Evolution is a Myth!

[Eudaimonist]

How about you stop using the word 'myth' in an incorrect way?

I've seen the word myth used in brightlight's way many times, including by atheists, and even including the Fellowship of Reason, of which I am a member. It's related to Joseph Campbell's use of the word.

Dictionaries are usually not very helpful when determining the proper uses of words. They are descriptive, not prescriptive, and usually only focus on the most popular meanings, and tend to define as widely as possible. Generally, I ignore dictionaries and focus on the context in which words are used to gather their meaning.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Paradoxum]

Let me explain myself a little better. Something functions as myth if it is a story that explains origins, suffering, and provides meaning for life. A myth tells us about our place in the universe. Myths are often false but they can also be true. For Christians, the story of the Christ is both myth and fact. For atheistic evolutionists, the grand narrative of evolution is both myth and fact. It is fact because it is true. It is myth because it plays a mythic role in our lives in that it tells us how we fit into the universe and supplies us with values and meaning. All people have myth.

This is why the grand evolutionary narrative functions as myth:

1. It tells us where we came from (the universe, natural phenomena, non-life)
2. It tells us why we're here (there is no reason)
3. It explains why we suffer (because everything suffers. Suffering is part of the essence of life.)
4. It supplies us with values (individual freedom, passing on genes, liberal democracy)
5. It gives meaning to our lives (there is no meaning other than the meaning we create. So create meaning!)

This is why I say that evolution serves a mythic purpose in our lives.

I know what you meant. But evolution doesn't tell us any of those things. Evolution could be true, and God could be real, so a theistic evolution might give different answers to a naturalistic evolution. Evolution must be combined with a philosophy (eg: Naturalism), to tell us anything more than the scientific theory.

Of course, if you dislike the term used in this way so much I would also be satisfied in saying that evolution is a narrative or evolution is a story. Are you ok with those terms instead?

I'm ok with meta-narrative. I would more willing to accept the word 'myth' if it was made clear that the myth is the combination of science and philosophy, not just the scientific theory.

 

[Eudaimonist]

To anyone who is "confused" by the use of the word myth in this thread, please investigate Joseph Campbell's writings. His work is required reading if you are a human being.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Paradoxum]

I've seen the word myth used in brightlight's way many times, including by atheists, and even including the Fellowship of Reason, of which I am a member. It's related to Joseph Campbell's use of the word.

Dictionaries are usually not very helpful when determining the proper uses of words. They are descriptive, not prescriptive, and usually only focus on the most popular meanings, and tend to define as widely as possible. Generally, I ignore dictionaries and focus on the context in which words are used to gather their meaning.


eudaimonia,

Mark

I get how the word can be used in that way, but I don't agree with it. I agree that dictionaries aren't always helpful, but I thought it would be the easiest way to get the point across.

I've sort of changed my position: I can accept naturalistic evolution being called a myth, but not the scientific theory of evolution. eg: philosophy can be a myth, but not science.

 

[Eleses]

10:22 AM 1/25/2013
If carbon dating is accurate and mankind is 10 -50,000 years back, then our calendars' are off, and it's 4
-44,000 A. D. because the chronological order of the Bible is true. The creator made similar primates, so
if there were erect humanoids, it was when God put souls in them that they became mankind. I'm just
saying, if we're going to speculate with theory this is mine! Prehistoric orators predated writing which
would mean that Biblical events could have occurred more than 6,000 years ago. Unwritten stories have
been past down through out human time in many cultures. Christ' appearance on earth was about 2,000
years ago, but B.C. time could have began in prerecorded history. There's no time in Eternity, so time
began when matter came into existence their saying billions of years back. So B.C. is just a point in time
and mankind(Adam)was created before then.
Written: 1/25/2013 A.M.

 

[Dave Ellis]

To anyone who is "confused" by the use of the word myth in this thread, please investigate Joseph Campbell's writings. His work is required reading if you are a human being.


eudaimonia,

Mark

I was initially confused because the argument doesn't apply to any definition of myth, even the one the OP is using. Evolution simply doesn't apply to any of the items they brought up.

The confusing part was that I read it along the standard arguments put forward by creationists that don't accept evolution as factual. However, myth still doesn't apply to the context of this argument. Therefore the argument is poorly formed, and incorrect either way.

 

[Dave Ellis]

10:22 AM 1/25/2013
If carbon dating is accurate and mankind is 10 -50,000 years back, then our calendars' are off, and it's 4-44,000 A. D. because the chronological order of the Bible is true. The creator made similar primates, so if there were erect humanoids, it was when God put souls in them that they became mankind. I'm just saying, if we're going to speculate with theory this is mine!

1. Carbon dating does not say we are 10-50,000 years old... try one or two hundred thousand years. To the best of our knowledge, Civilization is maybe 15,000 years old give or take a few thousand years.

2. The Chronological order in the Bible is demonstrably not true. For example, God made both "light" (which explicitly states separates night and day), and plant life (which requires sunlight to survive) before he made the sun.

3. Who is speculating with theory?

Prehistoric orators predated writing which would mean that Biblical events could have occurred more than 6,000 years ago. Unwritten stories have
been past down through out human time in many cultures.

That's true, but how do you know these stories are true without evidence, and in the case of many biblical stories have strong evidence that show they are not correct?

Christ' appearance on earth was about 2,000 years ago, but B.C. time could have began in prerecorded history. There's no time in Eternity, so time began when matter came into existence their saying billions of years back. So B.C. is just a point in time and mankind(Adam)was created before then.
Written: 1/25/2013 A.M.

B.C. is the time period which stretches from "creation" to the time Christ was said to have been born. Adam could not have existed before B.C, no matter if you believe in the Genesis creation myth, or a more scientific view of the world.

 

[Eudaimonist]

10:22 AM 1/25/2013
If carbon dating is accurate and mankind is 10 -50,000 years back, then our calendars' are off, and it's 4
-44,000 A. D. because the chronological order of the Bible is true.

eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Ripheus27]

Here's what was said: "All evolution is, is an observed fact that species change over time in nature. That's all."

No, that is NOT all. We have indeed observed species change over time, and even some speciation. Yet, ToE is FAR more than just that and you know it. Thus, the sentence is mythical.

Upon rereading this, sober and awake (with a little coffee hurting my heart), I realized that "ToE" here means "Theory of Evolution," not "Theory of Everything." My bad... I'm used to seeing "ToE" refer to the notion in physics, not biology.

 

[brightlights]

Yes, and I agree that evolution can function as a meta-narrative for some people. (BTW, this is a great thread idea!)

Thank you and thanks for participating. I agree that evolution does not automatically serve as a meta-narrative. I will clarify my meaning in another post.

My meta-narrative doesn't have much to do with evolution. I just don't see evolution as that relevant to my life. I don't care about where I come from as compared to who and what I am. So, my meta-narrative doesn't take the form of some grand vision -- the development of the universe, or of human history, or of something equally grandiose.

I haven't sat down and carefully written my meta-narrative, but now I think that I should. I think it would go something like the following. I might be taking a male perspective here.

We live the first portion of our lives as little children. We did not choose to be born, but are rather thrown into our lives. During this time we play and we wonder at who we might be when we grow up. Life is a Great Mystery.

In our adolescent years, we experiment with different roles and values, and ask ourselves who we really are and who we are to become as adults. We love heroes, and long to be heroic ourselves.

In our adult years, we first become aware in our gut that life is limited, and that if we are to fulfill our personal potential, we have to get moving with life. We have the best sense of what our talents are and who we are as individuals.

I have not yet reached by twilight years, so I can't speak about that with confidence. Perhaps that phase of life is largely about sharing wisdom with others, if one can, and valuing daily routines. I'll know better when I get there.

And then there is death. Death is the great The End to the epic adventure story of one's life. It does not destroy the meaning of one's life any more than a novel loses its meaning because there is a final page. For the rest of eternity, it will be true that one has existed and lived, and one's life shines like a jewel in eternity.

Quite a romantic narrative. Mind if I ask a few questions? I've gathered from other posts of yours that you highly value individualism. This seems to fit with your narrative. But a few questions about that... How are we connected with other people? How are we connected and related to previous generations? How are we connected with future generations? Is there a broader human story that begins before us and ends after us? That's what I really want to know about your story.

 

[brightlights]

I will clarify my meaning in another post.

I agree with many posters that evolution in its simplest sense is not enough to make a myth. When I say "evolution is a myth" what I really mean to say is that the modern narrative is a myth and evolution is a central character in that narrative. I am using "evolution" in this sense as shorthand for the whole package -- abiogenesis, random mutation, natural selection, and diversity of species. The modern narrative is a bit more complicated. Let me take a shot at what I believe the modern narrative to be. (And by the way, I take modern to refer to modernity, the philosophical age and mood, and not simply meaning "current").

The modern narrative:
1. In the beginning there was nothing, or perhaps there was God.
2. The big bang
3. The universe
4. Life
5. Evolution
6. Human life

6a. Human knowledge through superstition​

6b. Human knowledge through religion​

6c. Enlightenment -- human knowledge through science and reason​

7. Progress toward Utopia
8. Eventually Utopia

This story teaches us that rational and empirical knowledge is the chief or only sort of knowledge. It teaches us about the trajectory of history -- namely that each generation is more advanced than the former. So it teaches us to value progress. We value new more than the old. The modern story is moving toward something -- Utopia. Classical stories are moving away from something (like the Garden of Eden). In classical stories each generation moves further away from the golden age and so there is a sense of loss as history progresses. This is evident in the Lord of the Rings myth.

 

[brightlights]

The modern narrative shares similarities with the Christian narrative. Both have a creation element. The modern narrative does not have a "fall". The Christian narrative begins in Utopia and is about a journey to return to Utopia. The modern narrative begins in hell, so to speak, and journeys toward Utopia. The primary difference is that the modern narrative is about progressing and evolving toward Utopia while the Christian myth is about returning to the Utopia we've lost. That's why "repentance" is Christianity's primary value.

 

[brightlights]

I think we're on the right track! Let's continue to unpack this and then I have a few more questions.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Quite a romantic narrative.

Yes, thank you.

How are we connected with other people?

We are by nature social beings. We are connected with others in many ways -- love is obvious -- but our connection even involves storytelling regarding shared myths. I just happened to have finished watching my DVD copy of Sam Raimi's Spiderman movie, in which the myth of maturing and accepting responsibility for one's adult powers is explored. This is hardly the first story to address such an issue -- it's a cultural myth. In watching the movie, I experience a very real connection to others.

Getting back to love, the well-being of loved ones is tied to our own, and is indeed part of our own. The wise individualist understands that it is in his best interests to value his loved ones, and that this is no sacrifice. We are individuals, but other people are a part of our characteristically human pattern of existence. We aren't "lone wolves" by nature.

I haven't exhausted this subject. These are just examples.

How are we connected and related to previous generations?

We carry their legacy: their knowledge, their wisdom, their art... and their problems.

How are we connected with future generations?

We offer them our knowledge, our wisdom, our art, and our problems.

Is there a broader human story that begins before us and ends after us? That's what I really want to know about your story.

The story of humanity isn't my story. It is humanity's story. At best, I play the role of one of those no-name, non-speaking "extras" that one sees briefly on film, if that.

I don't know for certain where the human story is going. It hasn't fully been written yet. I'm hoping that humanity will eventually be able to create a prosperous and free interstellar civilization. I'm being optimistic and romantic. I suspect that there will be plenty of setbacks along the way, but I'm hoping that improvements will outweigh the setbacks in the long run.

Whatever happens, the future will largely be what humanity makes of it. If I had enough money, and enough patience with people who thought that I was crazy, I would be tempted to construct a Temple of Human Destiny. This place would be both a library and museum dedicated to the past, but also a quiet place to reflect on the unknown future and human potential. Perhaps it would contain exhibits related to science fiction and utopian/dystopian novels, along with cutting-edge science and technology, to spark contemplation about humanity's future.

Contrary to some mythologies, I don't believe in a Golden Age in the distant past. We don't come from any Garden of Eden. We took a big step closer to Eden with the Industrial Revolution, and we are today roughly as close to that as we ever have been, in spite of the significant problems of the world. Everything good that we have we must create and maintain through our own efforts. We hold the fire of creation in our mind-governed hands. If there is an Eden, it is in our future, and it will be of our own making.

eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[seeking Christ]

Upon rereading this, sober and awake (with a little coffee hurting my heart), I realized that "ToE" here means "Theory of Evolution," not "Theory of Everything." My bad... I'm used to seeing "ToE" refer to the notion in physics, not biology.

I only adopted that abbreviation via reading a different sub-forum, of this website. If you're accustomed to reading the theory of everything, it'd be interesting to see a thread on it!? As far as I knew it hadn't been formulated yet.

 

[seeking Christ]

I don't know for certain where the human story is going. It hasn't fully been written yet. I'm hoping that humanity will eventually be able to create a prosperous and free interstellar civilization.

The United Federation of Planets.

I suspect that there will be plenty of setbacks along the way,

Klingons!


Just pulling your leg

If I had enough money, and enough patience with people who thought that I was crazy, I would be tempted to construct a Temple of Human Destiny. This place would be both a library and museum dedicated to the past, but also a quiet place to reflect on the unknown future and human potential.

Might I suggest $ is not necessary, and this website can be exactly that? That this is consistent with the site owner's purpose in having non-Christian areas, because God Himself values even people that reject He exists?

Patience with people who think we are crazy is still needed here though

Perhaps it would contain exhibits related to science fiction and utopian/dystopian novels, along with cutting-edge science and technology, to spark contemplation about humanity's future.

All that can be found on this website.

We hold the fire of creation in our mind-governed hands.

Despite obvious differences in our meta-narratives, this statement here is CRUCIAL to Christianity. I see no reason why what needs to be done needs to be obstructed by any human differences.

 

[Ripheus27]

I only adopted that abbreviation via reading a different sub-forum, of this website. If you're accustomed to reading the theory of everything, it'd be interesting to see a thread on it!? As far as I knew it hadn't been formulated yet.

M-theory is, I think, an attempt at such a theory... There's also Max Tegmark's notion of an "ultimate ensemble" ([gr-qc/9704009] Is ``the theory of everything'' merely the ultimate ensemble theory?).

 

[Gadarene]

Why do I have the sinking feeling that this is just another attempt to force parity where it doesn't belong, like "atheism is a religion"....

 

[brightlights]

Why do I have the sinking feeling that this is just another attempt to force parity where it doesn't belong, like "atheism is a religion"....

Probably because you only read the OP.

 

[Paradoxum]

The modern narrative shares similarities with the Christian narrative. Both have a creation element. The modern narrative does not have a "fall". The Christian narrative begins in Utopia and is about a journey to return to Utopia. The modern narrative begins in hell, so to speak, and journeys toward Utopia. The primary difference is that the modern narrative is about progressing and evolving toward Utopia while the Christian myth is about returning to the Utopia we've lost. That's why "repentance" is Christianity's primary value.

I wouldn't say the Big Bang is anything like hell. More like a move from amoral to Utopia. Though I'm not sure 'Utopia' is the right word either.