Moral Darwinism: How We Became Hedonists

264 Pages·2002·3.42 MB·English

by  Benjamin Wiker (Author)

Acknowledgments ................................................7
r
Introduction ................................................... 15
I / It All Started with EpicurWIus ...................................3l
2 / Lucretius, the First Darwinian ................................. 59
3 / Christianity Versus Epicureanism ............................... 75
4 / The Fall and Rise of Epicureanism .............................. 95
5 / tie«tonianisrn: The New Face of Epicurean Materialism ............111
6 / The Moral Revolution of Materialism ........................... 143
7 / The Taming of Christianity, or Scripture Declawed ............... 178
8 / Epicureanism Becomes Darwinism .............................215
9 / How We Became Hedonists ................................... 255
Conclusion ....................................................289
Subject Index ..................................................32,3
Scripture Index ................................................329
I would like to thank the following for kind permission to quote at length from the listed works.
Epicurus excerpts from Brad Inwood and L. P. Gerson, The Epicurus Reader reprinted by
permission from Hackett Publishing Company, Inc. (copyright © 1994 by Ilacket Publishing
Conipany, Inc.).
Lucretius excerpts from Dc Rernm J'atura reprinted by permission of the publishers and the 'I-
rrstees of the Loeb Classical Librar;v from Lucretius, Loeb Classical Library Vol. L 181, translated
by IV. H. 1). Rouse, rev. by Martin F. Smith, Cambridge, Mass.: 11,11-vard University Press, 1924,
1975. The Loeb Classical Library® is a registered trademark of the President and F llows of Harvard
College.
Excerpts from Leviathan by Thomas Hobbes reprinted with the permission of Simon & Schuster,
Ine., from Leriathan by Thomas Hobbes, edited by Michael Oakeshott. Copyright (01962 by
Macmillan Publishing ('onipany.
Excerpts from I). F. Strauss reprinted from Lifc of'Jesus Critically E.ranained by David Fredrieh
Strauss, copyright ©1972 by Fortress Press. Used by permission of Augsburg Fortress.
Excerpts from Charles Darwin's Descent from Darwin, Charles, Descent of Man. Copyright ©1981
by Princeton University Press. Reprinted by per mission of Princeton University Press.
Excerpts from Spinoza reprinted from Benedict de Spinoza, A 77ieologicoPolitical Treatise and A
Political Treatise, translated by H. Ii. M. Elwes, copyright © by Dover Publications, Inc., 1951.
Excerpts from Margaret Sanger reprinted from Margaret Sanger, The Pivot of'('iv-ilization,
copyright © by the heirs of Margaret Sanger (represented by Alexander Sanger).
I have made multiple requests for permission to quote excerpts from James 11. Jones, Alfred C.
Kinsey: A Ptcblic/Private Life, W' W' Norton & Company, copyright ©1997. The publisher has not
responded to my requests.
Of course, I take full responsibility for all that appears in this book, but I would also like to thank
the following persons and institutions, all of whom contributed to making this book not only possible
but actual. 'lb begin with, Jay Richards and William Dembski, without whore my manuscript proposal
would still be gathering dust in a large stack of unopened manila envelopes, and for the
encouragement of other friends at Discovery Institute. Thanks also go out to all the many informed
members of Phylogeny who kindly answered research questions almost immediately after my asking
them, and to the ever cheerful and always helpful Gary Deddo at IV P. I also would like to express
my appreciation to the New 0xford Review; which first published "The Christian and the Epicurean,"
the article which, in seed form, gave rise to this book, and to thank Clark, whose appreciation for the
article gave me the courage early on to make it into a book. Special thanks also go out to Jonathan
Wells and Richard Weikart, who saved me from my own typpographical errors. Finally, I must thank
my best friend, editor-in-chief, spirit, lifter and wife, Teresa, without whom I never could have
finished such a task, and my children (Jacob, Anna, Pa,ith, Clare, Nathaniel and Beatrice), who
mourned my absence (hiring so many long days and late nights.
This book is dedicated to the memory of my greatest teacher; Ernest Jay Walters.
William A. Dembski
According to John Maynard Keynes, great intellectual and cultural movements frequently trace back
to thinkers who worked in obscurity and are now long forgotten. Of course, the converse also holds.
Great intellectual and cultural movements are often also associated with thinkers who worked in the
public eve and remain wildly popular. Some thinkers are both famous and influential. Others are only
influential.
This book focuses on two such thinkers, one largely forgotten, the other a household name. The
largely forgotten thinker is the ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus. The household name is Charles
Darwin. The two are related: Epicurus set in motion an intellectual movement that Charles Darwin
brought to completion.
Understanding this movement is absolutely key to understanding the current culture war. Believers
in God often scratch their heads about Western culture's continual moral decline. What was
unacceptable just a few years ago is today's alternative lifestyle and tomorrow's preferred lifestyle.
Abortion, euthanasia, divorce, sexual preference and drug abuse are jest a few of the moral issues
that have undergone massive changes in public perception.
Too often believers in God take a reactive approach to the culture war and throw their energy into
combating what they perceive as the most compelling evil of the moment. In the back of their minds,
however, is an awareness that something deeper and more fundamental is amiss and that the evils they
are combating are but symptoms of a more underlying and pervasive evil.
Several authors have attempted to get at the roots of the current culture war. James Davison hunter
has traced its sociological roots. Robert Bork has traced its political roots. Phillip Johnson has traced
its Darwinian roots. But none of them has traced the historical roots of the culture war back to its
metaphysical foundation. Ben I'Viker does that brilliantly in the present hook.
Insofar as traditional theists sense an underlying cause for the moral decline of Western culture, all
roads lead to Epicurus and the train of thought he set in motion. Though hardly a household name,
Epicurus is best remembered for making pleasure humanity's chief good. What is largely neglected
these (lays is how he conceived of pleasure and why he gave pleasure such a high status.
For Epicurus pleasure consisted in freedom from disturbance. Two forms of disturbance stood out
for Epicurus: the disturbance of God intervening in nature and the disturbance of an afterlife. For
Epicurus, to allow that God might intervene in the natural world and to take seriously the possibility
of an afterlife (with the moral accountability and judgment it implies) were incompatible with the
good life.
Although religious believers tend to think of belief in God and the promise of an afterlife as a
comfort, Epicurus and his disciples (ancient and contemporary) held precisely the opposite. A God
who intervenes in the natural world and thus in human affairs is a God who can derail our plans and
mess up our day. Moreover, an afterlife in which accounts from the present life get settled places
undue restrictions on how we live this present life. Thus, for Epicurus belief in a God who is actively
involved in the affairs of this world and who judges us in the next is a surefire way to destroy one's
personal peace and happiness.
To short-circuit belief in such a God, Epicurus proposed a mechanistic understanding of nature.
Accordingly, Epicurus conceived of nature as an aggregate of material entities operating by blind,
unbroken natural laws. God or the gods might exist, but they took no interest in the world, played no
role in human affairs and indeed could play no role in human affairs, since a material world operating
according to mechanistic principles leaves no place for meaningful divine interaction. Moreover,
since humans belonged to nature and consisted entirely of material entities, death amounted to a
dissolution of a material state and thus precluded any sort of ongoing conscious existence.
All of this has, of course, a very modern ring to it. 1vpically we identify it with the "modern
scientific worldview." What Ben Wiker is at pains to help us realize, however, is that the materialism
or naturalism of Epicurus is nothing other than an ideologically driven metaphysics that masquerades
as science but in fact serves as a stick with which to beat religious believers and disenfranchise them
in the square of public discourse. Phillip Johnson (see his Wedge of Truth) has argued this point in
the context of Darwinism. Wrker traces it to its fountainhead and then draws out its moral
implications for the present.
Epicurus's most prominent disciple is without question Charles Darwin. Darwinism is not only the
most recent incarnation of Epicurean philosophy but also the most potent formulation of that
philosophy to date. Darwinism's significance consists in the purported scientific justification it brings
to the Epicurean philosophy. But the science itself is weak and ad hoc. As Wiker shows, Darwinism
is essentially a moral and metaphysical crusade that fuels our contemporary moral debates.
Mirthernrore, Wyiker argues that the motivation behind Darwinism today is its alternative moral and
metaphysical vision rather than the promotion of science.
Wiker's project has nothing to do with scapegoating Epicurus, Darwin or anyone else for that
matter. To be sure, it is a temptation to find a target and blame all evils on it. There's even an old joke
about Satan standing outside a congregation Sunday morning weeping. Asked why he is weeping,
Satan responds, "They blame me for everything." Ultimately the problem is not Epicurus, Darwin or
their contemporary disciples. Ultimately the problem is whether reality at its base is purposive and
intelligent or mindless and material.
This is the great divide. All the ancient creation stories come down on one or the other side of this
question, making either blind natural forces or a transcendent purposive intelligence the fundamental
reality. Wrker brilliantly traces this divide to its metaphysical foundations. In so doing, he shows how
the challenge of intelligent design to the evolutionary naturalism of Darwin is not the latest flash in the
pan of the culture war but in fact con stitutes ground zero of the culture war.
Intelligent design is a moral and metaphysical threat to Darwinism. That is why Darwinian critics