ArchPundit

It just gets better and better:

Even at the highest level of discourse in our religion, in our faith, in our society, you have folks who are actually willing to act as if this is some kind of secondary matter where one can easily cede to the authority of ?modern science? without much detrimental effect upon anything else. And yet, if you even think about it for a minute, the implications of the understanding of the world, but especially of ourselves, that evolution represents, utterly destroys the foundation for any sense of a transcendent basis for human justice. And as a matter of fact, one ought to see that in the natural paradigm that evolution itself represents, the one that is most often, of course, presented ? and they’ll always tell you that it’s an oversimplification and so forth and so on, but at some level they’re lying ? because whoever stood up and made it clear that you summarize the whole business, at least in terms of what you might consider its social relevance, with the old phrase, ?the survival of the fittest,? right? Well, however you want to and with whatever complexity you want to interpret it, what that really suggests is that outcome validates existence. That’s what you’re really talking about. And in that sense, we’re looking at a situation in which, if there is any standard at all, that standard is simply what works. Whether you want to call it survival, dominance, whatever, the standard is simply ‘what works.’ But not what works in some general or cosmic sense, no, because the whole disappears. By this understanding, what works is to be understood only from the point of view of the particular being. And it reminds me, I think it was the start of an old TV show, ‘Hunter,’ and at the end of the m?lange that used to open the show, the hero would be beating up on somebody, and would be standing over him and they’d be closing out the credits and he would say, ?It works for me!?

Bad science meets bad religion meets bad politics.