Greetings,
Here is the source of this preposterous article:
http://www.harunyahya.com/evolution01.php
That's right folks, once again, it's the champion straw-clutcher, Harun Yahya.
I shall attempt to put right some of the many inaccuracies in this worryingly misleading piece of propaganda.
format_quote Originally Posted by
RighteousLady
That philosophy is "materialism", which holds a number of bogus views about why and how we came into being. Materialism maintains that there is nothing but the matter and that matter is the essence of everything, be it organic or inorganic. Starting out from this premise, it denies the existence of a divine Creator, that is, Allah. Reducing everything to the level of matter, this notion transforms man into a creature that heeds only matter and turns away from moral values of whatever kind. This is the beginning of big disasters that will befall a man’s life.
Nonsense. Materialism does not imply any turning away from moral values. In fact, since materialism is an ontological position, it has nothing to say about ethics at all.
The detriments of materialism are not only limited to individuals. Materialism also seeks to abolish the basic values on which the state and society rest and generate a soulless and insensitive society that pays attention only to matter.
More nonsense. Materialism, being an ontological position, has nothing whatsoever to say about political philsophy.
Another great evil of materialism is its underpinning of anarchist and divisive ideologies that take aim at the perpetuity of the state and the people. Communism, the foremost of these ideologies, is the natural political outcome of the materialist philosophy.
This is insidious and repugnant. First of all, Communism is anything but an anarchist ideology. The author really needs to learn what these two terms mean. Secondly, Communism is not the natural political outcome of materialist philosophy, and I'm baffled as to why Harun Yahya should think it is. Maybe he believes that because Karl Marx happened to be a materialist, everyone who is a materialist will also be a communist. That crazy logic could also justify the following abhorrent argument: "Osama bin Laden claims to be a Muslim. He is also a terrorist. Therefore all those who claim to be Muslims are terrorists."
Seeking to abolish such sacred notions as state and family, it constitutes the fundamental ideology of every form of separatist actions directed against the unitary structure of the state.
Again the writer misleadingly (or ignorantly) confuses an ontological position with ethical and political ones.
The theory of evolution constitutes the so-called scientific foundation of materialism that the communist ideology depends on.
Nonsense. Materialist philosophy is far older than Darwin's theory of natural selection, so to say Darwin's theories underpin materialism is utterly anachronistic. The author appears to have very little knowledge of the history of ideas.
In point of fact, materialist notions of every kind, Marx’s ideas being foremost among them, have utterly collapsed for the reason that the theory of evolution, which is in fact a 19th century dogma on which materialism rests, has been absolutely invalidated by the findings of modern science.
Nonsense. If this were true, then materialism would not be the dominant view of philosophers, as it currently is.
Science has disproved and continues to disprove the materialist hypothesis that recognises the existence of nothing but matter and it demonstrates that all beings are the products of creation by a superior being.
I wonder if the author has spoken to any scientists lately?
It should be pointed out that evolutionists have no answer to give to the book you are now reading. And they will not even attempt to answer it for they are aware that such an act will simply help everyone to a better understanding that evolution is simply a
lie.
Anyone attempting to disprove the theory of evolution would be taken a lot more seriously by the scientific community if they refrained from using emotive language such as this. It has no place in scientific discourse.
Karl Marx made it clear that Darwin’s theory provided a solid ground for materialism and thus also for communism. He also showed his sympathy to Darwin by dedicating Das Kapital, which is considered as his greatest work, to him. In the German edition of the book, he wrote: "From a devoted admirer to Charles Darwin".
Several of the misguided points on Marx and his thought have already been addressed by HeiGou, so let me simply say that, judging from his article, I am certain that Harun Yahya has not read Marx's works, since he appears to be so unfamiliar with the basics of his thought. If this is the case, it is truly reprehensible for him to be pontificating about the evils of Marxism in attempt to further his particular agenda against Darwin and materialism.
This article would actually be laughable in its inaccuracy were it not for the fact that so many people on this forum appear to take Harun Yahya's ignorant diatribes seriously.
Peace