Fallacies of a Darwinian Worldview
The book Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind paints a congruent evolutionist worldview, interpreting the events of history and the possibilities of the future from a strictly Darwinian perspective. The book was a struggle to read, not only because it argues for a worldview completely opposite to mine, but also because it makes many unsustained claims with the appereance of being “scientific.” I was reminded of Albert Einstein’s discussion on science and religion in Berlin in 1930. He said, “you are right in speaking of the moral foundations of science but you cannot turn round and speak of the scientific foundations of morality.” (Max Jammer, Einstein and Religion, 69). Apparently, Yuval Harari disagrees.
As the reading progressed I was reminded that this worldview is shared by many non-religious people today. There is a reason why the book became translated from Hebrew into more than 30 languages, becoming a New York Times bestseller and receiving the National Library of China’s Wenjin Book Award. I may disagree with most of the book, but I cannot disagree with the fact that it represents a worldview that is increasingly popular across the globe.
Summary
In Sapiens, Israeli professor Yuval Harari presents his perspective of the history of humans from the beginning of time to the twenty-first century. Based on a Darwinian worldview, he argues that humans (sapiens) have managed to dominate the world because of their unique ability to cooperate in flexible ways in large numbers. In contrast to any other animal, humans are able to reach this unprecedented level of cooperation because they have the ability to create imaginary stories that are not rooted in the objective physical realm. Once these stories are shared by a large number of people, it allows them to cooperate and to adapt to new ways of life. These ever-changing ways of life have been the result of three key revolutions in human history: the cognitive revolution, the agricultural revolution, and the scientific revolution. Our current way of life was highly shaped by the industrial and biological revolution, and has led us to unprecedented times of world peace and financial prosperity. However, it has damaged the ecosystem, lead many species to extinction, and it has failed to increase happiness. He concludes the book painting a picture of a future highly shaped by the new advances in biology and computer science, in which he sees humans evolving into superior beings that may eventually create new forms of organic and inorganic life. This new stage in the life of sapiens will require new stories, new ethics and new ways of thinking in order to adapt to the new ways of life that lie ahead.
REFLECTION
Harari’s version of history, the nature of humanity, and the foundations of ethics is in complete opposition to the Christian worldview. No speech seems to highlight this contrast better than the Apostle Paul’s words while visiting Athens:
“The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by human hands. And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything. Rather, he himself gives everyone life and breath and everything else. From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands. God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us. ‘For in him we live and move and have our being.’ As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring.’ “Therefore since we are God’s offspring, we should not think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone—an image made by human design and skill. In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to everyone by raising him from the dead.” (Acts 17:24-31)
Paul had no problem defending his message because it was rooted in historical fact. There were eye witnesses, there was a record, there was evidence. I cannot say that same about Harari’s book.
Perhaps, Harari’s own words capture well my perception of his worldview: “It’s hard to accept this line of thinking. The problem is a fallacy of reasoning embedded deep in our psyches.” (383) What Harari fails to acknowledge is that the Darwinian worldview that he presents as scientific and historical is not a fact evidenced in the organic world, but a story rooted in imagination.
The process of natural selection is the one scientific foundation of Darwinian theory. Species develop certain adaptations as they interact with their surroundings. This is scientific fact corroborated by the scientific method. What is not scientific, however, is the belief that natural selection leads to macro-evolution; that it can, after billions of years, cause a bacteria to become a human being.
Darwinian worldview argues that cellular life in its most basic form began by chance. This may have made sense to Darwin because during his lifetime we did not know much about microbiology. However, we now know that even the most simple bacteria is a rather complex system built through the instructions found in their DNA. The idea that chance can lead proteins to organize themselves into molecules, or molecules into an organic code with complete instructions for cellular formation has never been observed in the real world. In fact, scientific evidence clearly demonstrates that proteins can only become molecules and molecules can build cells if there is an existing DNA with the instructions. Biochemist Dr. Michael J. Behe in his famous book Darwin’s Black Box argues for the concept of irreducible complexity, which has led many scientists abandon strict Darwinian theory for Intelligent Design views. In simple terms, my son can build the Lego Millennium Falcon if he spends several hours following the instructions that came in the box. However, he cannot make a millennium falcon by shaking the box over millions of years. In the same way, cells cannot be built without genetic instructions. DNA is a pre-requisite for life.
In addition, the idea that DNA mutations can develop new species has never been observed through the scientific method. Instead, as biologist Dr. Douglas Axe has demonstrated in the lab, the protein restructuring for DNA mutation is rather too complex for what is required in Darwinian theory. Natural selection has only been observed within species but not across species. In other words, a bacteria never ceases to be a bacteria, even if it becomes resistant to antibiotics.
Harari is blinded to his own assumptions, failing to recognize that his evolutionary worldview of molecules-to-man evolution is not history, it is not science, it is not fact. It is a story embedded in imagination. Perhaps, his most congruent assertion in this matter is when he says, “Unfortunately, there are few certainties regarding the lives of our forager ancestors.” (41)
The major problem of telling a version of history from a failed scientific foundation is that it results in moral relativism. As Harari points out about Darwinian scientists, “they increasingly argue that human behavior is determined by hormones, genes, and synopsis, rather than by free will-the same forces that determine the behavior of chimpanzees, wolves, and ants. Our judicial and political systems largely try to sweep such inconvenient discoveries under the carpet. But in all frankness, how long can we maintain the wall separating the department of biology from the department of law and political science? (230). In Harari’s worldview, we are simply the sum of our cells, with no objective parameter for ethical behavior except for our subjective opinion. Many scientists disagree with Harari. Among them is Oxford Mathematician Dr. John Lenox who wrote Gunning for God to present an intricate argument to dismantle the ethical fallacies of Darwinian theory. As Einstein’s said, “Every attempt to reduce ethics to scientific formulae must fail.” (Jammer, 69).
Despite the loudness of Darwinian thought and the fallacies within it, Sapiens brings some interesting thoughts about the times in which we live and the power of shared stories.
The book succeeds in describing the influential forces that have shaped our modern world. It brings to the table similar concepts to the ones shared by Benedict Anderson in Imagined Communities, or Karl Polanyi in the Great Transformation. It also reminds us that technological advances create new ethical dilemmas that society must face. The very definition of what it means to be human, the transformation of the nuclear family, and the advocacy for fluid sexual identities are some of the current dilemmas that society and the church are facing today. In light of the current advances in microbiology and the manipulation of DNA, these ethical issues will continue to get more complex.
The best insight I gained from this book is the power of shared stories. Cooperation is best attained when we share the same narrative. I must remember that it is not just facts and charts that inspire people to pursue a cause. The intentional use of true stories can be a powerful tool to encourage people and move hearts to action. This was the power that led author Lee Stroble to abandon Harari’s worldview and to embrace a new life with God. In the same way, I pray that God will use us at Ethnos Bible Church to influence many more as we speak truth in love, so that no matter how popular Harari’s worldview is around the world, they will come to know the true Author of the brief history of humankind.
About the Author
Pablo Morales
Pablo Morales serves as the Lead Pastor of Ethnos Bible Church in Texas. He is currently pursuing the Doctor of Ministry degree in Leadership and Global Perspectives at Portland Seminary in order to understand what it takes to develop a healthy multiethnic church.16 responses to “Fallacies of a Darwinian Worldview”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Pablo,
Brilliant blog – of us all, you have presented the most calm and reasoned criticism of this book: a book that begs to be criticized.
Your keen mind has drawn a great application. “The intentional use of true stories can be a powerful tool to encourage people and move hearts to action. Now, that is a powerful leadership lesson that made the painful experience of reading this book worth it.”
I don’t have a question for you. I simply want to commend you for demonstrating the missing link in evolutionary thought, and in Harari’s thought.
Isn’t this inspiring to keep our faith and or academic work grounded in fact and reality?
Marc,
Thank you for your kind words. This was a hard read and a hard blog to write! As I shared with you before, I was turned off by this book. However, in moments I was fascinated by some of the historical facts (like the stories behind the use of clocks in modern times) as well as intrigued by some of Harari’s perspectives. It is always encouraging to see how biblical theology is the most congruent worldview. It does not only provide answers that are consistent with reality, but it also recognizes that without this consistency it becomes worthless. Ultimately, that is the main difference that separates Christianity from myth.
Harari did a lecture about his book in Europe that was posted on youtube. It has 25,897 views. It is a summary of the key ideas in Sapiens. If you are interested you can watch it at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOO5xrEiC0M
Pablo
I had my fill of Harari watching a video of him talking about his book Homo Deus. If you want to curl your hair – watch that one.
I have often told people that I believe the Bible (in part) because it offers the best explanation of why life and the world are the way they are.
Marc, I’ll check that video too, even though I may need a break from Harari for a while (:
I feel the same way about the intellectual reason for upholding the Scriptures. I often mention a similar perspective when discipling new believers.
Pablo
Pablo:
In total agreement with your assessment (see my post to concur) both from a theological and scientific position. The aggravation is when someone speaks intellectually, sells some books, and is able to neutralize God it seems to be acceptable to the sapiens population.
I did find a few nuggets in the book. The idea of a “shared story” is comforting and challenging. It is a touch of present reality.
How do we help the narrative of Jesus to become a part of today’s “shared story”? It is deemed archaic or we try to make it attractional, at the sake of making the cross seem like it is irrelevant.
Phil
Phil,
I also felt concerned after reading the book because it captures a congruent worldview of the predominant Darwinian worldview that permeates much of our society. Harari connects evolution with its ethical implications (or should I say unethical?) and with the relativism that corrodes the very foundation of civilization. Of course, they do not see it that way. In their eyes, we Christians are the ones limiting progress because of our close-mindedness and our out-of-date moral framework.
I am reminded that the message of the cross is non-sense for the one perishing, and it has been so from the beginning. I am also reminded that Satan has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they may remain in bondage to sin. The Apostle Paul warned us about false teachers who would introduce false teaching and would draw many crowds because they can deliver the message that people want to hear. This is what I see happening here. The message is a life without a God to be accountable to. Instead, we are the gods who can create our own rules and our own forms of life. Basically, this is just a new form of the same message that Satan used to deceive the first humans. Same message; different package.
Perhaps, the best way of making the message of the gospel attractive is by living it. Conversely, the worst way to damage the reputation of Christ is by preaching obedience but living in disobedience. People may argue all they want at the intellectual level, but the one thing that they cannot deny is the power of the gospel when displayed in a real person who has moved from darkness into light. I believe that this is the most powerful way to keep the gospel relevant in a society that is plagued by Darwinian deception.
Pablo
Hi Pablo,
Leslie Newbigin, the British theologian and bishop, served the church in India 40 years and when he returned to England, he discovered a post-Christian country. One of the things he argued in his writings was that he was convinced that the gospel and Christian story longer made sense to people. It didn’t jive with what they were discovering in science, especially in relation to evolutionary biology and cosmology. Further, it had little that is innovative to say about contemporary challenges and opportunities.
One of the things I’m wondering about is what strategy you might suggest for relating the Christian story to someone inhabiting Harari’s world? The strategy that you seemed to employ in your essay above was to reject / disprove his story (with scientific evidence). I do wonder if that strategy would be successful.
Loren,
Based on my ministry experience, I can identify with Newbigin’s observations. Harari is presenting a very congruent perspective of Darwinian thought. He captures the mindset of many people today, including people outside as well as inside the church.
You asked me, “One of the things I’m wondering about is what strategy you might suggest for relating the Christian story to someone inhabiting Harari’s world?” As I think about your question, I believe that the strategy depends on the audience inhabiting Harari’s world.
I have learned that there are three types of people in Harari’s world. One group is what I call the militant atheist. This person is not interested in dialogue or intelligent conversation. The person is simply interested in arguing and putting down Christianity. Often this person is not driven by a genuine intellectual interest but by bitterness. Having been disappointed by God or the church, this person has found refuge in darwinian dogma. I avoid talking about religious views with this group because it normally does not lead anywhere. Instead, it is wiser to get to know them and let them see my walk. If they have been disappointed by Christianity and God, we can only gain their trust by showing ourselves trustworthy and congruent rather than by engaging in logical arguments. So my main strategy to relate to this group is to show them Christ by the way I live in grace and love.
The second group in Harari’s world is formed by people who hold to evolutionary dogma but with limited understanding of scientific issues. This person is not antagonistic towards Christianity or God, and it’s not driven by bitterness. This person is simply uninformed. If I discern that the person has open ears, I may engage in conversation that is more technical, provide reference materials or videos on the topic to foster curiosity. This type of conversation may lead to deeper personal conversations that may open the opportunity to explain the gospel. So my strategy to relate to this group is to expose them to resources and new ideas with the hope that if they are seeking with intellectual integrity they will eventually find Christ. A good example of this type of person is author Lee Strobel.
The third group in Harari’s world is formed by people who hold to an evolutionary worldview, but they are at a point of spiritual need and they are open to have the gospel explained to them. When ministering to this person I focus primarily in helping them understand the gospel, so that they can respond to it. I do not focus on talking about evolution at this point. If the person believes in the gospel, we will mentor that new believer through our one-on-one discipleship program. It is in that context that we end up talking about worldview issues. At this later stage, the interaction is one of “faith seeking understanding.” Consequently, this is the best time to provide more information, references, and books written from several authors on the topic. So my strategy for this third group is to focus on leading them to believe in Christ first, and then help them build understanding through mentorship.
When Christians try to relate to people in Harari’s world with an arrogant and argumentative attitude I think that it pushes people away from Christ rather than closer to Him. That’s why I believe that it is important to discern which one of the three groups I am interacting with. I am thankful that there are many good materials produced by Christian scientists that we can use today to understand key scientific issues. I have enjoyed John Lennox, a mathematician from Oxford who has not only written intelligently about the topic, but who has also debated with Dawkins a few times. I have also enjoyed the DVDs about Intelligent Design from the Discovery Institute as well as the conferences from the Institute for Creation Research and Answers in Genesis.
One final thought. Every time that I am trying to minister to an unbeliever, I am conscious that I cannot convert anybody; only God can change a heart. I am just an instrument that can point people to Christ. I believe that the best way of pointing people to Christ is by embracing a combination of dependance on God’s Spirit, a walk of integrity and grace, and an informed faith that can engage in intelligent conversations. These three ingredients can become useful instruments in ministering to a world that is blind to the message of the cross.
Pablo
Wow Pablo. Wonderfully written. It’s all about the importance of story. What’s been your most successful way of sharing our Jesus story?
Pablo,
Great insight! I very much agree with your reflection of Sapains. You referred to the power of story and/or narrative. Why do you think that a story is sometimes even more powerful that statistical data?
Aaron
Aaron, it seems that stories can touch the emotions in a way that facts can’t. Stories can also create a sense of commonality that strengthens relationships. When stories highlight a set of values that we care for, suddenly we feel identified with the cause and are more likely to get involved. I see that effect when I take my sons selling popcorn for scouts. A home that knows nothing about scouting may not buy a thing. However, people tend to be more generous when they themselves were involved in scouts growing up. They do not know my kids, but they share the same story, which moves them to connect at an emotional level. Have you noticed a similar phenomenon in your teaching or preaching ministry?
Pablo
Pablo,
Great insightful blog and I do agree. Loved this quote: I must remember that it is not just facts and charts that inspire people to pursue a cause.
With this in mind, how would you inspire people like Harari to accept an opposite view? Is it even possible?
Jason
Jason, that’s the one-million-dollar question! I am always reminded that a person who shares Harari’s worldview is spiritually dead. Consequently, it is beyond my power to change their hearts or minds. Only God can. So the best I can do is to find different ways to point them to God by living the faith in grace, and by engage them in intelligent conversations when they are willing to dialogue.
Loren brought up a similar issue above. You may be interested in reading my response to his question for a more detailed answer.
Pablo
Pablo,
Thank you for such a superb critique of Harari’s book, Sapiens. The lesson you have taught our Cohort is to exercise humility and objectivity when reading material that is diametrically opposed to our Christian belief systems. We need to make it a practice of approaching such material with the view of demonstrating how error in worldly thought and behavior actually amplifies the theological maxims of the Bible.
You have anticipated Loren’s question. As you noted, the best way of making the message of the gospel attravective is by living it. Thank you for opening the eyes of our understanding.
Claire,
Thank you for your encouragement. Reading this book was intriguing and alarming. I imagine that anyone with Christian convictions would feel the same way going through these pages!
Pablo
Hi Pablo,
This is a true statement, “Harari is presenting a very congruent perspective of Darwinian thought, that captures the mindset of many people today”. However it is being present in an excellent manner, which brought a quick question to my mind … why leaders are not framing the gospel with the most powerful tool, “Love”? Because it is the world greatest story … being told.
Thanks Rose Maria