On analytical thinking

In the wake of a certain Creationist-Evolutionist debate I saw today, I urge readers to momentarily look beyond the curtain of conflicting ideas and to instead scrutinize the drift of how ideas are interpreted in our contemporary zeitgeist. I speak frankly regarding both sides of this outdated argument because I find something beneath its surface more unsettling than the debate itself.

The analytical nature of modern thinking pits people against each other on ideological grounds. There exists currently an overwhelming need to be "right" and to "prove" claims as "fact." After we have "proven" that something is "fact," we must defend that "fact" incessantly. There is also an ongoing obsession with proving the other person wrong before he can prove you wrong. This is ultimately harmful to actual human interests. The drive to uphold existing arguments is also counterproductive to true rational thought.

Darwinian theory allegedly purported that human evolution produced racial groups and that some were inferior to others. And in Genesis, God curses the descendants of Noah's son Ham. Both Darwin and the writers or curators of Genesis were most probably exposed to cultural/political biases from their respective times. And those written biases translated into the early twentieth century when both Darwin and Genesis were used to uphold the myth of white superiority.

There also exists a need to prove or discredit the entirety of a work rather than giving an impartial assessment of its many respective parts. A person, ideology, literary work, scientific journal, or religious text must only be 100% right or 100% wrong.

In the course of the debate, Darwin was discredited on the basis of contradicting literal Biblical teaching and even promoting racist ideas. A question was put forth for to the Creationist in regards to the practicality of believing all of the Bible literally, even specific laws of Deuteronomy that have no place in contemporary western society.

Does that mean that Biblical commandments to love one another are inherently illegitimate? Does that mean Darwin wasted years of his life making observations about nature and recording them?

Nothing is ever perfect. Take things for how they are. Draw observation-based understandings, but change gears when something new can be ascertained or taken into account. And be filled with wonder in things whether or not your analytical-intellectual inclination is to agree with them upon further assessment.