Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please - Mark Twain
I'm currently undertaking part-time studies toward an masters of science degree in astronomy at Swinburne University in Melbourne, so it is difficult for me to avoid knowing that 2009 is the International Year of Astronomy - initiated by the International Astronomical Union and UNESCO. It commemorates the 400th anniversary of the invention of Galileo's telescope. Although Galileo removed our planet from the centre of the universe, one other great scientist - Charles Darwin - changed our view of what it means to be human. He showed that we are basically animals, and knocked man off his pedestal. This year also happens to coincide with the 200th anniversary of Darwin's birth - he was born on the 12th February 1809. To commemorate the occasion, there have been a lot of celebrations, including some very interesting public lectures and exhibits here in Melbourne. What did Darwin do that was so great? As we look around our planet, we notice that lifeforms - be they humans, ducks, giraffes, etc. - are ideally suited to their habitats. We also notice that bodily organs, such as eyes, ears, brains, are ideally suited to the function they perform. We thus get the impression of deliberate design - as though a supernatural creator designed life on Earth. Darwin answered the question of how such complex "design" could arise. The answer was cumulative evolution by natural selection - i.e. by non-random survival of random hereditary modifications/mutations. In a species whose members are not identical, those members that have characteristics that make them best adapted to their environments (fittest) are most likely to procreate and pass on their inherited characteristics. This theory of evolution by natural selection made redundant the concept of a creator God. However, the creationists have attempted to restore God to his pedestal by introducing the concept of "Intelligent Design".
Moreover, the creationists have tried to pass off Intelligent Design as a legitimate science that should be taught in schools alongside Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection.
Intelligent design is an alternative to the Genesis story of creation. All creation myths depend on the actions of some kind of all-powerful supernatural being, and Genesis (and Intelligent Design) is one of many creations myths. Intelligent design is a kind of guided evolution. According to the supporters of intelligent design, evolution does occur - obviously the evidence for evolution is impossible even for fundamentalist Christians to ignore - but this evolution is guided by the hand of an intelligent super-being, i.e. a God.
Evolution by cumulative natural selection effectively explains how organized complex lifeforms can arise out of primeval simplicity. It is the only scientific theory that is capable of explaining the emergence of complex life, and there is much scientific evidence to back it up. Intelligent design invokes an already existing intelligent deity - i.e. it postulates a complex being without offering any explanation for its origin. Intelligent design has no hope of ever being proven or disproven by scientific testing, so it is not science.
Unfortunately, Intelligent Design is not the only example of how science - and, in particular, Darwin's theory - have been misused to satisfy particular agendas. The distortion of Darwin's argument resulted in perhaps the darkest period in the history of the 20th century.
Adolf Hitler embraced Darwinism, and used it to formulate his own form of ethics. In Hitler's mind, the Darwinian struggle for existence, particularly the struggle between different races, became the sole basis for morality. In a 1923 speech, Hitler said the following:
"... Right alone is of no use to whomever does not have the power to impose his right. The strong have always triumphed. All of nature is a constant struggle between power and weakness, a constant triumph of the strong over the weak ...". You might imagine him frothing at the mouth as he said this.
Hitler believed that the evolutionary progress and the struggle for existence was essential to promote progress. Here's what he had to say in Mein Kampf with regard to the notion of limiting population growth:
"... If reproduction is limited and the number of births decreased, then the natural struggle for existence, which only allows the strongest and healthiest to survive, will be replaced by the obvious desire to save at any cost even the weakest and sickest. Thereby a progeny is produced, which must become ever more miserable ... Eventually a stronger race will usurp the weaker ..."
So it is morally acceptable for the weak to be destroyed by the strong. This may give the impression of a barbaric, amoral dog-eat-dog view of the world, but Hitler also believed that ethics are purely a human construction - thus contradicting the Christian philosophy that ethics are God-given. He believed that morality and ethics are a product of evolution, and exist in only the "most highly evolved beings", humans. To Hitler, Germans (or Aryans) were the epitome of human morality - being more cultural and altruistic than any other race. In contrast, Jews were greedy, deceitful and immoral. He believed that strength and weakness not only applied to physical and mental attributes, but also to moral attributes. To Hitler, Jews were a morally inferior race of humans.
Using Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection, Hitler was able to morally justify any action - including genocide and infanticide - if it contributed to the evolutionary improvement of the human race. Evolution and the biological improvement of the human species was the ultimate goal. The concept of human rights only encouraged weakness.
Obviously, Hitler's use of Darwinism was twisted and misguided. Hitler's concept of evolutionary improvement was influenced by his racial prejudices, and his personal opinion of what constitutes improvement. Just as the proponents of Intelligent Design tried to smuggle a creator God into evolutionary biology, Hitler tried to smuggle his own moral opinions and values.
Some people may blame science for Hitler's view of the world. They may blame science for the invention of weapons of mass destruction - after all, without Einstein's theory of relativity, the atomic bomb would never have been invented. But such people are misguided. Science makes no judgment about what is or isn't ethical; this is a matter for individuals and for society. Science, in its purest forms, seeks to learn more about the universe. However, science can (and should) provide advice and information as input to ethical discussions. Problems occur when our leaders allow their own prejudices and agendas to distort the facts. We saw this with Hitler; we saw this with George W. Bush who ignored advice he didn't like - e.g. AIDS-prevention initiatives and stem-cell research - because it went against his religious-based objections. Bush also ostracized scientists who argued that humans made a significant contribution to climate change. Hopefully the new tenant of the White House will treat science with the respect it deserves. Science should be allowed to advance, and should be used for the good of the planet; but this cannot happen if politicians and religious groups insist on distorting the facts.
