Evolutionary Ethics is the belief that the ethical beliefs of humanity have simply evolved
alongside humanity as a means of aiding mankind in the quest for survival and reproduction.1
Furthermore, some supporters of this ethical theory state that the moral drives human beings
have are merely illusions. These illusions stem from a part of mankind’s genetic code in an
attempt to have humanity live in harmony, coexisting amongst itself with the idea of survival
being the foundation.2 The result of this thought process then is that mankind has no real moral
duties. Everything that is in place that stands as a moral law or truth is unfounded. The question
then arises, if these moral duties are truly illusionary in nature, then why ought mankind follow
them?
This brings about certain problems that stem from evolutionary ethics itself. First, what
is the source for these “biological illusions”? What spurred evolution to incorporate them into
mankind’s DNA? Some might say that it was for the need of survival, but it could also be argued
that God played a role as well.3 This would allow for a friendly middle ground between
creationists and evolutionists. God could have created these genetic impulses, but then allowed
evolution to take its course. The issue here though, is that such a position destroys evolutionary
ethics as a whole due to God being the source of morality, and thus, if he is the source, then
other aspects of the relationship between God and humanity must be explored and considered
as well.
Secondly, if moral ethics are merely imaginative, where then does human dignity enter
in?4 this is perhaps the most compelling argument against evolutionary ethics. Consider a
person who believes in this system of beliefs: they might be a doctor who saves many lives, but
they also perform countless abortions. Another person who also hold to evolutionary ethics
could rightfully go to them and take their life. How is this possible? The doctor, though saving
some lives, is playing judge, jury, and executioner – quite literally in fact – against the survival of
those aborted babies. Logically then, it makes sense to rid humanity of the one who is causing
more damage to the survival of the human race. However, the doctor would argue for his or her
life, claiming that they do not deserve to die. The inevitable “why” question, though reasonably
answered by the doctor’s pleas, remains in all reality unanswered, for the doctor carries no
intrinsic value based on evolutionary ethics. What then is to stop any one from committing mass
murder, genocide, or any other heinous crime? According to this system of beliefs, nothing.
This leads to the third issue. Why trust any belief concerning ethics at all?5 If humanity
ethical code is based only on survival of the individual and that of humanity, there is no
foundation for any belief, for these beliefs themselves are illusionary. Self-interest reigns and
only the strong – whether it be mental, physical, or even emotional strength - will survive to see
the next sunrise.
All of this clearly shows that evolutionary ethics and the ethics God sets forth are not
compatible. God teaches obedience which results in blessings. These blessings include long life,
1 Robertson McQuilkin and Paul Copan, An Introduction to Biblical Ethics, 3rd Ed., (Downers
Grove: IVP Academic, 2014), 180.
2 McQuilkin and Copan, 180.
3 McQuilkin and Copan, 181.
4 Ibid.
5 Ibid.
the continuation of one’s family line, and ultimately, paradise with Him due to the gift of Jesus
Christ. Every problem that arises from evolutionary ethics is solved by looking to the one source
of ethics: God.6
6 Ibid., 182.
