Deconstructing Darwin and the natural world

Re “The devolution of a believer,” Opinion, Sept. 19

John Darnton paints an incorrect picture of Charles Darwin’s views on God. Substantial evidence from many sources indicates that Darwin can best be described as an agnostic, as one might expect from such an insightful man. Darwin understood that atheism is as logically indefensible as is theism, and that agnosticism is the only logically defensible position regarding the existence of a god.


Fellow, Center for theNeurobiology of Learning and Memory, UC Irvine



Many people assume that a natural world has no moral validity or purpose but a divinely created world does.

There is nothing inherently moral about a divinely created world. What is moral about people murdering and displacing other people from their homes because God revealed they should? If there are divine creators, who is to say they didn’t intelligently design precisely the system described by evolutionists?

And if the process described by evolutionists is accurate, can’t there be a “natural” morality built into it? For example, survival of the human species may depend on cooperation more than competition. Do unto thy neighbor as you would have thy neighbor do unto you may be the most natural way to survive in a godless universe.