Jonathan Finnegan

November 17, 2013

Philosophy 105
Darwinism Vs. Creationism
Since the beginning of human civilization, we as a species have tried to make
sense of the world around us. For centuries we have tried to rationalize how the universe
began, how we were created, and just what happens after death? Since the earliest
humans did not have science, or the knowledge and resources to understand how things
worked, they had to look to the next best thing. They had to look to religion. While faith
and religion did give us humans the answers we neededwhat if religion was wrong?
Was it? Can we just drop the beliefs humanity followed for centuries now that science
has offered us an alternative system of beliefs? Lets consider it logically.
One of the most common religious beliefs as to the origin of humans and the
universe as we know it, is called creationism. Creationism suggests that all things were
created by a divine being or god. Many religions believe in their own unique accounts
of creationism, but they all include a god as the creator. One of the most common
creationist beliefs, which I personally was brought up learning, stems from the bible. The
biblical creation story claims that God created the world in six days and on the seventh
day he rested. This creationism suggests that the universe was created only 6,000 to
10,000 years ago, and that all living things were created at the same time, as they are
now. But hold on! Both of these go against the whole idea evolution. How can this be?
Evolution is supported by science!
On the opposite side of the spectrum, Darwinism is a scientific belief that relates
to evolution. Evolution, unlike creationism, suggests that all things on Earth evolved
over long periods of times, and have resulted in all things we now know. Darwinism,
founded by Charles Darwin, suggests similarly, that all things share common ancestors

Jonathan Finnegan
November 17, 2013
Philosophy 105
and adapt to their environment in order to be better fit for survival. This occurs through
countless mutations in a species, but when a mutation improves a species chances of
survival, they are passed on. This process is known as natural selection.
For example, if one species of bird inhabited an isolated island, overtime,
countless minor mutations would occur within that species. Most mutations would have
little effect on the species, but select mutations might offer the bird advantages in
surviving on the island. Over a long period of time, the birds with those positive
mutations would survive, while those without that positive mutation would eventually die
off. However, if the same birds inhabited separate islands, certain mutations would be
better depending on the islands. Therefore, the dominant bird on one island would likely
be different compared to a bird on a separate island, because its environment forced it to
adapt differently. Charles Darwin found proof of exactly this on his expedition around
the world.
In order to prove whether a theory is even reliable, it must be supported by certain
criteria of adequacy. First and foremost, the theory must be testable. Second the theory
is more likely to be true if it is fruitful, or if it can lead to new information or ideas in
order to open up new topics for discovery. Thirdly, the theory should support a wide
scope, or as much evidence possible. The more the theory can support or predict, the less
likely it is to be false. Fourth, the theory should be simple. The simpler a theory is the
less we must assume to believe it; and the more we have to assume, the more we can be
wrong. Finally, a theory should support conservatism. This entails the theory fitting with
the established beliefs that are already accepted.

Jonathan Finnegan
November 17, 2013
Philosophy 105
To explore which theory is superior, we must test both theories. Darwinism and
evolution in general can be supported and proved by countless areas of study, but can
creationism? The biblical account of creationism gives a number of claims that can be
tested. For instance, as was mentioned before, creationism supports the belief that all
things were created 6,000 to 10,000 years ago, but we know that the earth is much older
than that. According to an article published by the United States geological Survey
Department, the Earth formed nearly 4.54 billion years ago. We can also look to the
claim about all living things being created at the same time, as they are now. We know
from fossils and many other areas of study, that living things evolved from very different
organisms, which are no longer around now, at different times in history. Both of these
claims contradict well-known scientific discoveries. On the other hand, these fossils,
along with the old age of Earth can support Darwinism. Creationism is testable, its just
wrong.
Darwinism: 1, Creationism: 0.
Next, we can test how fruitful both theories are. The theory of Darwinism would
lead to countless studies and further research into Earth, the universe, extinct organisms,
what caused their extinction, and so much more. Creationism on the other hand would
blind us to so many areas of study. In much the same way, we can look to the scope both
theories would support. Darwinism would explain so much. From evolution, to why we
have fossils older than 10,000 years old. In reality, creationism either brings up more
questions then it answers, or it leaves us with unexplained phenomena.
Darwinism: 3, Creationism: 0.

Jonathan Finnegan
November 17, 2013
Philosophy 105
While Darwinism is an elaborate theory, it is relatively simple. Naturally, living
things become extinct, while those better suited to survive, will live on and becomes the
norm of the species, or its own species altogether. Furthermore, Darwinism does not
require us to assume anything to make sense of it. Creationism on the other hand
requires us to assume many things. To list a few, we must assume that there is a god,
that the writers of the bible were somehow guided by that god to write something they
did not witness, that a man and woman were made all at once, and placed by god into the
Garden of Eden. Even if we want to believe these things, we know they are illogical.
But if we are to believe in creationism, we have to assume that all of these things are not
only possible, but we must assume them to be true. Thats a lot to blindly assume for the
sake of a theory.
Darwinism: 4, Creationism: 0.
Lastly, if we look to conservatism, it is clear that Darwinism once again beats
creationism. Darwinism fits perfectly into the history we learned in school. Darwinism
fits with the our knowledge of dinosaurs, the idea of our evolution from monkeys, the
idea of cave men, the big bang. The list can go on and on. But if we look to creationism,
it contradicts much of the beliefs we may already have. In school we learned of
evolution, we know that the Earth is older than creationism claims. All in all from a
logical standpoint, Darwinism is superior. Darwinism employs all of the criteria of
adequacy, while creationism directly goes against much of it. It is understandable why
humans once rationalize what they didnt know through these creationist beliefs, but we
have science now. We may not have all the answers, but we have the resources and the
knowledge to construct a more accurate theory than what we believed two thousand years

Jonathan Finnegan
November 17, 2013
Philosophy 105
ago. Its time to accept that, but in the meantime we can just look at the scoreboard.
Darwinism: 5, Creationism: 0.

Works Cited
"http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/geotime/age.html." United States Geological Survey. USGS, 9
July 2007. Web. 18 Nov. 2013. <http://www.usgs.gov/>.
Vaughn, Lewis. The Power of Critical Thinking. Fourth ed. New York: Oxford University
Press, 2013. Print.