The logical conclusion of Darwinism is a-morality

The following quotations are directly from “Darwinism: Survival without Purpose” from found in the November 2007 issue of Acts & Facts, written by Jerry Bergman, Ph.D. (Bold added to highlight the a-moral nature of Evolution)


Humans have always wondered about the meaning of life...life has no higher purpose than to perpetuate the survival of DNA...life has no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind pitiless indifference. Richard Dawkins
Scheff, Liam. 2007. The Dawkins Delusion. Salvo, 2:94.


Darwin "was keenly aware that admitting any purposefulness whatsoever to the question of the origin of species would put his theory of natural selection on a very slippery slope."
Turner, J. Scott. 2007. The Tinkerer's Accomplice: How Design Emerges from Life Itself. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 206.


The ultimate purposelessness of evolution, and thus of the life that it produces, was eloquently expressed by Professor Lawrence Krauss as follows: "We're just a bit of pollution…. If you got rid of us…the universe would be largely the same. We're completely irrelevant."
Panek, Richard. 2007. Out There. New York Times Magazine, 56.


"undirected, purposeless variation to the blind, uncaring process of natural selection, Darwin made theological or spiritual explanations of the life processes superfluous."
Futuyma, Douglas J. 1998. Evolutionary Biology. Third Edition, Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates, 5.


John Alcock, an evolutionary biologist, therefore concluded that "we exist solely to propagate the genes within us."
Alcock, John. 1998. Animal Behavior: An Evolutionary Approach. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates, 16, 609.


The pleasant outward face of nature was precisely that--only an outward face. Underneath was perpetual struggle, species against species, individual against individual. Life was ruled by death...destruction was the key to reproductive success. All the theological meaning was thus stripped out by Darwin and replaced by the concept of competition. All the telos, the purpose, on which natural theologians based their ideas of perfect adaptation was redirected into Malthusian--Darwinian--struggle.
Browne, Janet. 1995. Charles Darwin: Voyaging, A Biography. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 542.


Neo-Darwinist Richard Dawkins recognized the purposelessness of such a system:
In a universe of blind physical forces and genetic replication some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won't find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice. The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.
Dawkins, Richard. 1995. River Out of Eden. New York: Basic Books, 133.

---------------------------------------

Some of the above quotes/Evolutionists say that we only exist to pass on our genes ("selfish genes"). Speaking from within their system, that is totally wrong!

Evoltuion has NO PURPOSE. Things, animals and people exist, but they have no purpose.

If they pass on their genes, they have offspring. That could be a measure of success. However, perhaps some humans would measure success as "having climed the most mountains."

The Evolutionary system has been built on a tautology of "Survival of the Fittest." And they deem "survival" as good. But they have no philosophical basis for this belief. It is presupposed.


Another conclusion of their "Survival of the Fittest" has lead some to conclude that rape is just another method of ensuring the passing on of genes. Refer to Randy Thornhill and Craig Palmer. A Natural History of Rape (Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, 1999).