Social Darwinism and New Creation

1 Commentby   |  10.18.13  |  Student Posts

Darwin’s “Survival of the Fittest” provides a great explanation for evolutionary psychology and the existence of man. However, the theory is not substantial enough to fit into any category really because Darwin saw no purpose in why this process occurs. It just simply does. Therefore, that makes it difficult to understand the existence of surviving creatures and societies through a Creation lens because the created things just die off or survive- without meaning. The Fall lens doesn’t fit (although I could possibly be reasoned) because the species are not dying off for any particular reason other than that they cannot out survive another species. Redemption and Restoration imply a sense of bringing something back, fulfilling a purpose. Because Darwin saw life as purposeless and without design for an end goal, there is no need; and further, no understanding of redemption or restoration. For these reasons, I find that Spencer’s understanding of Darwinism to be more complete and to provide a perspective into the New Creation lens of understanding. “To Spencer evolution has a purpose; it is the mechanism by which perfection is approximated”. New Creation implies a renewal of God’s whole creation. While Darwinism does not include *all *of creation, it does bring about a level of renewal. Traits and species are perfected over time, passed along. According to Spencer, “if the principles of evolution are allowed to operate freely, all living organisms will approximate perfection”. In theory, all things should be able to attain perfection. It is possible to screen Social Darwinism as an influence/understanding of the Fall. Primarily so for reasons such as the fact that in actuality, evolution does not bring *all *things to perfection (only those that survive) and then the future impact it had on American Individualism and Capitalism. Not to say that Individualism and Capitalism is bad, but the understanding of laissez-faire, free competition is often criticized by the media and certain political circles. They may classify the implications of Spencer’s theory to the Fall. However, I think with his original intentions, Social Darwinism best fits New Creation.

Comment

1 Comment

  1. Levi Ritchie
    10:41 pm, 10.21.13

    Social Darwinism is such a sticky topic. Even if you believe it’s true, there’s no real way to go about “implementing it.” Opinions of a social darwinist can range from an excuse for poor conditions in society, to belligerence and hatred directed toward the poor and suffering for them being so unfit to live on the planet.

    You gave me a thought, though, with regard to “New Creation.” We almost see the opposite of what social darwinists claimed happening right now, which I suppose you could argue resembles the Fall. Except it’s not social darwinism, it’s literal Darwinism: In modern society, the factors that cause someone to have lots of unprotected sex with multiple partners (thus spreading their genes more aggressively) are not generally the things that help society get better. It can be something as simple but harmful as a latex allergy or as complex as any number of self-destructive relationship habits.

    Whether it’s our business trying to fight that through force or coercion is another issue entirely. Thanks for the post.

Add a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.