What are the problems with evolutionary ethics? McQuilkin and Copan examine four
problems with the view and begin the discussion with a definition; “evolutionary ethics: our
ethical beliefs have developed through evolution to help us survive and reproduce.”1#Any
moral authority is imagined and created solely from our biological need to exist and
procreate.
The first point made by the authors is that evolutionary theory does not preclude God as the
moral authority. The second point is established on society’s value of human dignity. All
civilized legal systems are based on the fact that human life has tremendous value.
Evolutionary ethics would reject any premise that doesn’t promote the individual’s needs
even if it meant the death of someone else. “Third, why trust our beliefs at all if we are just
the product of those material, valueless, mindless processes?”2#If moral convictions are not
true, then are any beliefs true; including our ability to reason and conceptualize theories like
evolution? Lastly, evolutionary ethicists identify a duty of humans to care for their children
and reproduce. Where does this duty originate within the context of the theory? “Naturalism
can only describe how humans actually do function or behave, not prescribe how they ought
to act.”3
I believe the most compelling reason to reject evolutionary ethics is McQuilkin and Copan’s
second point discussing human dignity. If mankind were solely focused on survival and
procreation, there are some activities that should be occurring that do not in a civilized world.
The addicted homeless people are one example. If individuals wanted to increase their
potential to survive, would not society just eliminate that population which is a drain on
precious resources and more likely to commit crimes? If a world leader or Nobel prize winner
needed a major organ transplant, would society not provide one from a life less likely to
survive and provide value to society (help others survive)? These tenants sound Nazi
Germany like, ethics which the entire world has rejected. The premise of evolutionary ethics
is flawed, based solely on society’s historical acceptance of human dignity and the value of a
single human life.
Evolutionary ethics is incompatible with biblical ethics. As noted above evolutionary ethics is
flawed just as is evolutionary theory. Any resultant of an unsound theory is by definition
unsound and in error. This is not the primary reason for the incompatibility however. Biblical
ethics give mankind a hope and a purpose. Evolutionary ethics is winning the universal
lottery to life and die with no lasting impact. In the first chapter of the Bible, “God said, “Let
us make man in our image, after our likeness” (Gen. 1:26a, ESV)4#Psalms states “For you
formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother's womb” (Ps. 139:13). The
prophet Jeremiah writes “For I know the plans I have for you, declares the Lord, plans for
welfare and not for evil, to give you a future and a hope” (Jer. 29:11). Biblical ethics says
individuals were purposefully created by God in his image for a future and a hope.
Evolutionary ethics provide mankind a possibility of survival for eighty years or so and
maybe offspring. No reason for living, no purpose in life and no hope for a future.
Word Count: 547
1#Robertson McQuilkin and Paul Copan,#An Introduction to Biblical Ethics: Walking in the Way of
Wisdom#(Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2017), 180.
2#Ibid.
3#Ibid., 181.
