Saturday, February 21, 2009

The intellectual world was rocked when natural scientist Charles Darwin published his book, The Origin of Species in 1859. In his biography of Darwin, The Reluctant Mr. Darwin, author David Quammen, shares an intimate portrait of the man behind the scientist. Darwin was the wealthy son of a British aristocrat and attended Oxford, studying theology. Bored with and unconvinced by the natural theology of his day he entered biology instead of medicine as had his brother. As he developed his views of the origin of new species arising in response to the environments on isolated islands, his conflict with theology grew. His final break with theology came when his beloved little daughter died in agony. It was at this point that Darwin, like many sensitive thinkers, put the question of theodicy to himself and coming to no conclusion turned his back on the God-idea.
The question of theodicy was most clearly formulated by the philosopher Leibniz who introduced the term in his 1710 work "Theodicic Essays on the Benevolence of God, the Free Will of man, and the Origin of Evil". The problem of evil had been tossed around since Epicurus, who is generally credited with first expounding the problem of evil, and it is sometimes called "the Epicurean paradox" or "the riddle of Epicurus."
"Either God wants to abolish evil, and cannot; or he can, but does not want to. If he wants to, but cannot, he is impotent. If he can, but does not want to, he is wicked. If God can abolish evil, and God really wants to do it, why is there evil in the world?" — Epicurus, as quoted in 2000 Years of Disbelief .
What Darwin did for the intellectual community of his day was to demote theology's man-idea from its standing in its own eyes as just slightly below God and accountable for becoming perfect through sacramental religion, to a new man-idea just slightly above the higher primates. This demotion from angel to animal brought outrage then and can do so now. We are nothing more than a fancy animal with a slightly modified brain evolved under natural selection pressures determined by the local environment. The brain of a human is not much different than other animal brains, has more similarities with them than differences and may conceivably be replaceable one day with an artificial brain instead. Darwin's discovery of the mechanism (law) of natural selection did wonders for natural science, gave a new respect for animals, even microscopic ones, in the scientific community and opened the way for science to free itself from religion and to evolve into today's neurological and DNA investigations. The new view into the mechanics of the brain and body also gave rise to such science fiction predictions as Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, Orwell's, Animal Farm, and today's quest for higher forms of artificial intelligence (robots) which challenge our use of the word "human." What exactly does it signify? Where is the line between animal and human? Human and machine?
What Darwin didn't do was to see himself standing facing his greatest discovery presented in the devastation of his daughter's death. For this he had no vision and he turned away from it. Although he helped to liberate science from old theology, he was himself no giant of metaphysics, or of self-understanding, no profound listener to the Voice within us all. Quammen tells us that Darwin called his wife, "mommie" and would run and hide in her breasts when he was disturbed When confronted by the problem of evil so personally his brilliance did not speak to him but was silent.
What do you hear when the question of evil is put to you? As an academic exercise it is trivial and you may hear nothing. I travelled through seminary and 20 years of professional ministry and never really thought about the Epicurian Riddle, until the question was put to me so profoundly personally in several experiences in close sequence that brought me to the point where I imagine Darwin stood that day his little daughter died and drove me into the search for truth called metaphysics.
Scientific Metaphysics was emerging into its own mainstream discussion about the time of Darwin, taking as its premise and platform the opposite view of life, that life is Spirit and not matter. Metaphysical scientist Mary Baker Eddy in her textbook, Science and Health with Key to Scriptures wrote:

"Christian Science goes to the bottom of mental action, and reveals the theodicy which indicates the rightness of all divine action, as the emanation of divine Mind, and the consequent wrongness of the opposite so-called action,--evil...." S&H 104:13

Fifty years later metaphysician Margaret Laird wrote: "In the effort to overcome evil, as if there could be a false substance, the mind is kept in constant confusion and turmoil. Our problems and their solutions rest in ourselves. Certain it is that evil will remain with us just as long as we entertain the belief that there is evil."

4 comments:

  1. I sense that Darwin if alive today would be able to reconcile his discoveries with with divine Science's ideas and today's scientific discoveries that we live in a world of just Intelligence-Awareness energy patterns. He intuitively knew that the God of his times made no sense. He would be shocked how neo-Darwinists have taken his discoveries to support materialistic reductionism.

    The only evil there is unrecognized good, as we haven't the vision to see the Phoenix bird coming out of the ashes as we have such an unsimultaneous time concept where the old leaving or being taken away from us is evil and we haven't seen the new appear yet. The old story of Jospeh in the Bible points to that if we focus on just a part which seems bad, we are blind to the larger picture. Evil is only evil to those who confine their concept of concept to be a certain way. Loss is gain.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Wynne
    What do you hear when the question of evil is put to you?

    The voice/whisper within.

    Margaret Laird's quote above: our problems and their solutions rest within ourselves. As long as we believe in evil, evil remains with us.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Upon the consideration of Evil/Good; Dark/Light

    (Imagine four black circles above this poem.)

    Are these holes?
    or are they solid, balls, round and
    smooth, in delicious color?
    If they be holes; are they vacuums of
    emptiness; holes of pain and longing?
    or are they windows into lovely inner
    worlds, and other lands?
    And if balls, are they light and soft
    with bounce and bright color?
    or are they bombs bringing
    Death?
    An interesting tension,
    isn't it?
    1986
    *********************************

    As the painting "Unstilling--Darkness Blooms!"
    I opened a book to this poem (1988)

    "To go in the dark with a light is to know the light.

    To know the dark--go dark.
    Go without sight,
    And find that
    the dark, too, blooms and sings,
    And is travelled by
    dark feet, and dark wings!"
    L.A.
    ********
    Lillian de Waters "The Seamless Robe" Pg. 102/103

    "God has prepared for us a 'Table', laden with genuine Substance, even in the "wilderness," or seeming dark places; for every spot is the same holy ground,--the same place of completeness in Infinite Wisdom and Love. So that we can all say when confronted by a "wilderness," Now is the time, Here is the place, and I am the one to know that Perfection, Peace, Health and Harmony are always omnipresent, always in earth as in Heaven.
    Jesus was in himself the great "reconciliation" between Eternity and time, Heaven and earth, spiritual Reality and person, place or thing. He said plainly, "The works that I do, (through the consciousness that I am)
    shall ye do, also, (for we are all the same Being)"

    Lillian de Waters pg.102
    "To anyone who feels he has had some experience of Perfection...Turn more completely from appearances to Reality, and "sit down in the Kingdom of God."
    Wynne

    ReplyDelete