Beliefs and Hypotheses
My trite depth of knowledge concerning the “Theory of Evolution”, “Human Evolution” might hinder my elaboration in this post. The nuance of it was instilled in me while exploring the principles and theories of Genetics by Dr. Rothman, whom I have the right to believe an ardent fan of Darwin. Though I felt duly annoyed by his exacerbating passion for Darwin in class, I would like to condone the fact that I have acquired a significant amount of knowledge regarding Darwin’s hypotheses due to that.
My summarized understanding of Darwin’s natural selection is as below:
1. Fitness of species = reproductive health of species i.e. The species that reproduce the most is the fittest
2. Variations will occur in any species
3. Nature/environment will be the main determinant of the survivability of the variants through indirect ways
4. Evolution is a very slow and ongoing process
5. Of course there’s more to this but I will leave it up to this.
My peers (being the faithful Muslims) rejected whatever the professor taught when he dallied on evolution and such which I think is not a good way to approach knowledge. But I’m not to speak about that. I find that the hypotheses Darwin presented was very rational and logical, plus I do not think they contradict with religion at all. The only thing that might be considered blaspheme is that the hypotheses insinuates that human arose from lesser species and nothing more.
Looking past that, I find that what people do not want to understand is the essence of Darwin’s hypotheses which are very plain and straightforward. I have yet to involve myself in any debate regarding Human Evolution in religion but I would like to express my reactions towards the total rejection of Darwin’s hypotheses by certain avenues; that is the average religion-following person.
I am surprised and dismayed at the same time encountering people who claim Darwin’s hypotheses as preposterous, non-logical and irrational without first understanding the basics of it. To reject any knowledge without fully understanding it, to me that is not a very reasonable thing to do.
Speaking as a Muslim, this is my thoughts, all knowledge comes from Allah and to deny any knowledge is to deny God, no knowledge is evil or bad but it is the person utilizing the knowledge that should be judged.
I do not wish to assume but personally I think if people understand the essence of the hypotheses they would understand that anything beyond that is extrapolating and can only be proved by definite evidence. The hypotheses will not shake or deny any foundation for any religion and if a person thinks it does then they should not reject it but instead seek for the truth, rather than barking and harking at it.
This is turning into more of a rant but let us ignore that shall we? I firmly believe that the essence of Darwin’s “Natural Selection” that I have not fully elaborated hold true until definitive evidence says I’m wrong and that it does not contradict religion in any manner.
My final words are,one does not need to be presented with so-called astounding facts nor be immersed in an environment of lies/sins to have his or her belief undermined. A person’s belief can only be shaken only if the person allows it to be so.
December 21, 2009 at 5:34 AM
I salute your intellectual honesty in dealing with the matter... Most ppl tend to be closed minded and reject Darwin's proposals outright before they even begin to get fully acquainted with the whole theory. Your attitude is to be applauded here. Delve further and then make your judgment. Sooner or later there will be a time when you'll have to make a choice btween religion n science. They r not in any way compatible, take my word.
For a start, go read "the god delusion" by R Dawkins.