Ellis Washington: Darwin & C. S. Lewis, Part 2

Buffoon Award

The Retard-o-tron™ exploded this morning. It started out as it always does when it finds something crazy, with sirens and flashing lights. But then it gave an almost human shriek of horror, followed by a deep groan, and finally it burst into pieces. We’ll have to get another.

With its dying gasp, the fatally-exhausted device led us to an article in WorldNetDaily (WND) — thus the jolly buffoon logo above this post. It’s another masterpiece by one of our WND favorites — Ellis Washington, whom we last described in this earlier post. The new article is Ellis’ follow-up to one we wrote about last week — see Ellis Washington: Darwin, C. S. Lewis, & Magic.

Today’s essay from Ellis, which cruelly overloaded the Retard-o-tron™, is C.S. Lewis: When science becomes magic, Part 2. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us:

Conventional thinking by the progressive left treats science as something innovative, original and modern. For C.S. Lewis, however, science was more closely related to ancient magic.

The “left” likes science, so presumably the “right” hates it. Alas, that’s all too true in today’s American political spectrum. As for science being related to magic, if that’s an accurate description of what Lewis thought, he was an imbecile. Ellis then introduces what he’s talking about today by repeating what he told us last week:

Lewis characterized science and magic as analogous, emphasizing three different ways science and magic are similar: 1) Science/magic as the ability to function as religion demanding absolute obedience, devotion and worship; 2) Science/magic as credulity commands groupthink and ironically promotes a lack of skepticism; and 3) Science/magic as power over the world in order to dominate society and triumph over nature and the universe.

Ellis spends the rest of his essay elaborating on those points. We’ll skip most of it, giving you only the parts where he mentions Darwin and evolution — starting with this:

Science has the capacity to induce worship to the same degree as any religion; her prophets are scientists and professors, their decrees infallible! Indeed, doesn’t a magical view of the world beguile one with a sense of awe that surely life is more than our humdrum daily lives? This grandeur of the universe gives us a sense of meaning and purpose that transcends the physical world, entering the realm of the metaphysical world. Even for those people who aren’t religious, this magical view of the world can in fact be more compelling, because science-as-religion substitutes God (religion) for scientism (magic, politics). Therefore, in reality, since Darwin’s “The Origin of Species” (1859), modern science has indeed devolved into a pseudo-religion; a racist, diabolical cult and a servile slave to socialist politics and government funding.

If you’re not vomiting yet, there’s something wrong with you. Let it out — an occasional purge is good for you. Let’s read on:

A second way science and magic are similar, according to C. S. Lewis, is their encouragement of a lack of skepticism. [BWAHAHAHAHAHA!] This may seem paradoxical to many people; however, science/magic can support a kind of credulous thinking where you just slavishly believe whatever “the expert” says. Skeptics or dissenting views, for example, are ridiculed as “global warming deniers,” “flat-Earthers” and are routinely denied tenure as professors. How does science encourage this kind of credulous and slavish groupthink? Lewis pointed out that in the modern world, people will believe almost anything if it’s dressed up in the name of science.

Dressing up nonsense so it has some of the trappings of science is a favorite tactic of creationists, who are forever peddling their “creation science.” It’s also a propaganda technique of the Discoveroids with their “theory” of intelligent design. Ellis continues:

According to Lewis, another example of science-inspired groupthink was Darwinism, or evolution atheism – the popular idea that matter could magically transmute itself into complex and conscious living things through a blind and unguided process independent of “God.” Lewis’ skepticism about materialistic evolution questioned the ability of Darwin’s theory to explain for complex structures, like the human eye, through a blind, unguided progression like natural selection.

Earlier we said that if Lewis truly believed such things, then he was an imbecile. We now amend that to add that he was also a madman. Here’s more:

The third connection concerning science and magic, according to Lewis, is the lust for power. Magic covets power above all things. Magicians, fortunetellers, witches all crave power over the natural world and over the universe. They desire to possess the deeper, mysterious powers of nature in order to control it, to control people.

Fortunately, religious leaders never succumb to those temptations. Moving along:

Likewise, Lewis understood that much of modern science was actually derived from power over the world, and beginning in the 1860s [Darwin published his theory in 1859], using that godlike power was imperative to usher in a new age of scientific utopia. Therefore, science is now the new savior to recreate our world independent of “God.”

We were so much better off in the Dark Ages, before science enslaved us. Skipping a bunch (trust us, you’re not missing anything) we come to the thundering climax:

Besides Darwin, Nietzsche and Freud, one of the greatest heroes of the political and academic left is Karl Marx (1818-1883), the father of communism and socialism, who plainly stated: “My life’s goal is to dethrone God and destroy capitalism.” I challenge anyone to demonstrate that, nearly six years into the Obama administration, Marx’s diabolical intent has not been enforced into every aspect of American life, culture, society and policy.

That was probably true of Marx, but it has nothing to do with Darwin — or science. Ellis doesn’t care; he doesn’t even know what he’s writing. In his typical style, he just throws a bunch of stuff together into an incoherent jumble and it gets published by WorldNetDaily. No wonder the Retard-o-tron™ exploded.

Copyright © 2013. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

17 responses to “Ellis Washington: Darwin & C. S. Lewis, Part 2

  1. Charles Deetz ;)

    Where do you even begin to digest this, let alone refute it? Is it okay for me to go to the end and invoke my corollary to Godwin’s Law, (can I call it Deetz’s corollary?): Your argument is invalid if you call Obama a socialist, marxist, communist … or satan.

  2. Ellis Wordsalad writes

    Karl Marx…stated: “My life’s goal is to dethrone God and destroy capitalism.”

    Not to defend Marx, but the “quote” Washington offers here appears altogether bogus. You can find many copies of it on creationist websites, but without any actual attribution to writings of Marx.

    Of course, Marx was an atheist, but would such ever talk about ‘dethroning’ a diety? Sounds a lazy and sloppy made-up quote to me…

  3. Richard Olson

    I searched for but could not locate the quote Megalonyx references above. In the process, however, I came across two that are interesting.

    1. The Bible is cited as the most prolific-selling book ever written, but consider this [eat it, WorldNetDaily]:
    If we agree that the Bible is a work of collective authorship, only Mohammed rivals Marx in the number of professed and devoted followers recruited by a single author. And the competition is not really very close. The followers of Marx far outnumber the sons of the Prophet.
    John Kenneth Galbraith, in The Age Of Uncertainty, Ch. 3, p. 77

    2. Who knew Mitt Romney & his merry band of libertarian capitalists are Marxist:
    Is that to say we are against Free Trade? No, we are for Free Trade, because by Free Trade all economical laws, with their most astounding contradictions, will act upon a larger scale, upon the territory of the whole earth; and because from the uniting of all these contradictions in a single group, where they will stand face to face, will result the struggle which will itself eventuate in the emancipation of the proletariat.
    Writing in the Chartist newspaper, (1847), in Marx Engels Collected Works Vol 6, pg 290

  4. Stephen Kennedy

    After yesterday’s mind bender from Ken Ham I did not think it was possible for anyone, not even another creationist, to write something even more mindless and incoherent than Ham’s drivel but just a day later Ellis manages to do it. I am surprised that the Retard-o-tron lasted as long as it did.

  5. Ellis makes CS Lewis look like much more of a simpleton nutter than any rational argument ever could.

    It pains me to say that we owe Ellis a debt of gratitude.

  6. Megalonyx wonders:

    “[W]ould [an atheist thinker such as Marx] ever talk about ‘dethroning’ a diety?”

    All too fleet typing fingers aside ( :P ), the logical absurdity of such a notion escapes only cretinists.

  7. Charles Deetz ;)

    @Con-Tester, I’d always had a view of CS Lewis as a liberal christian philosopher. I really think Ellis is muddying his reputation by using his as a crutch for this rant. Lewis would know the difference between what Ellis was up to, and object. Lewis knew the difference between science and religion and magic. That he wrote books about religion that used magic should be enough to refute Ellis and suggest his hypocrisy.

    The whole “science/magic” bit just begs to be “magic/religion”. While Ellis’s cell phone seems like magic, it is run by science. While there is no getting around Jesus raising the dead as anything other than magic.

  8. Ceteris Paribus

    Ellis Washington challenges: “I challenge anyone to demonstrate that, nearly six years into the Obama administration, Marx’s diabolical intent has not been enforced into every aspect of American life, culture, society and policy.”

    History doesn’t repeat, someone said, but it rhymes. It was also six years after Eisenhower was elected and had appointed Earl Warren to the Supreme Court that the John Birch Society was founded by Republican proto-wingnut Robert Welch.

    If Ellis himself were alive back then he might have been able to write: “I challenge anyone to demonstrate that, nearly six years into the Eisenhower administration, Marx’s diabolical intent has not been enforced into every aspect of American live, culture, society and policy”

    Ellis should honor the muses of history and poetry by abandoning writing for the WND rag to get on with what the Lord God Himself intended as Ellis’ real lifework: That of founding The John Birch Society v2.0 movement.

  9. “If you’re not vomiting yet, there’s something wrong with you.”
    Of course there is something wrong with me – I’m a progressive leftist. Which means I have been used to stupid right wing fact free rants for decades. One gets used to everything.
    The best response, so I have learned, is LOLling.

  10. Charles Deetz ;), I always found CS Lewis’ apologetics drearily shallow, anorexic, naïve, long on emotive rhetoric and short on substance. In that context, he dished up comforting sermon fodder for the uncritical believer, the only purpose of which was to bolster and reinvigorate belief, and persuasive only to those who already believe.

    It’s clear enough that Ellis does CS Lewis a disservice when viewed from a less fanatical believer’s perspective. Seen from the perspective of an unbeliever, Ellis does a good job of eviscerating CS Lewis’ pitiful whinge-mongering.

  11. I missed part 1 and just skimmed the above, so forgive me if this was discussed already: I read that, despite being one of the most approvingly-cited dead people by today’s anti-evolution activists, Lewis had no problem with evolution. Granted, he died long before the ID scam, and at the beginning of “scientific” creationism. So it’s possibly that he could have fallen for the “life is too complex to arise by ‘chance'” nonsense, if not the “‘kinds’ popped up in a few days” nonsense. But from most of what I read I think it’s more likely that he would be like Francis Collins, very religious, but critical of creationism/ID.

  12. I agree with Frank J. I’m a Christian and I’ve read a lot of CS Lewis, like Francis Collins and others. I think it’s clear that his intellectual lineage leads to modern theistic evolutionists and not Ken Ham or Ellis W. Creationists and ID proponents have been trying to claim him based on some statements he made about “evolutionism”. Creationist Jay Wile has criticized his fellow Creationists for this case of body-snatching. He even got a reply from C.S. Lewis’s son on the matter:

    “Did Jack believe in evolution as a possible tool of ongoing creation? Yes, naturally. Did he believe in “Evolutionism”? No.”

    http://blog.drwile.com/?p=6336

    People who are familiar with a subject (like creation/evolution) often use nuanced terminology that gets pounded flat when it’s retold by less nuanced sources speaking to fairly uniformed audiences. This is clearly the case when people quote Lewis’s rebuke of “Evolutionism” in “Funeral of a Great Myth”. It’s quite clear that he’s not talking about biology if you actually read it, but if you quote it and remove the “-ism”, you can make an excellent case that CS Lewis was the Ken Ham of his time.

    (more info and link on Lewis and evolution: http://modsynthesis.com/2011/08/07/c-s-lewis/ )

  13. Lewis was a Christian apologist. he made no claims to the contrary. this is quite distinct from the big tent if of creationism we see today.

  14. on another note i’m sick of the so called conservatives coopting the term patriot and acting as if they are the great defenders of freedom and capitalism and fiscal responsibility. our freedoms have been threatened for some time and Congress will go on merrily spending money wastefully regardless of whether Obama or anyone else is in office and with or without obamacare

  15. TJW: “Lewis was a Christian apologist. he made no claims to the contrary. this is quite distinct from the big tent if creationism we see today.”

    Exactly. Today’s reality is far different from the caricature that most people see, and that most of us critics sloppily allow to persist. Many vocal critics of ID/creationism are devout Christians, even evangelicals, while key ID peddlers include Jews (Medved, Klinghoffer) and even an agnostic (Berlinski). What unites these activists is not any particular religious affiliation or belief that independent evidence validates one of the mutually-contradictory literal interpretations of Genesis, but rather a radical, paranoid authoritarian agenda that forces them to promote unreasonable doubt of evolution by whatever means they can get away with.

  16. so SC, do you have closet full of Retard-O-Trons ready to go as Ellis and others keeping blowing them up? Gosh, aren’t they expensive?

  17. Techreseller inquires: “so SC, do you have closet full of Retard-O-Trons ready to go as Ellis and others keeping blowing them up? Gosh, aren’t they expensive?”

    Yes, they are expensive, but I’m getting a big discount for ordering in quantity.