Serendip is an independent site partnering with faculty at multiple colleges and universities around the world. Happy exploring!

Evolution Of Evolutionary Literature

skhemka's picture
Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4


Humans have chosen to stick with two main stories concerning human existence, one is the “story of creation” involving God and the other is the story of evolution itself. People have taken sides and chosen to believe one story over the other. The people who believe in creation stories give absolutely no credit to evolution. They believe that evolution is “just a story” written by “just some man”. While I think that people can choose to believe in anything they want to, disagreeing with evolution is a mode of thoughtless denial and/or ignorance.

Evolution can be refuted as the story for our (human) existence but evolution itself cannot be proved false. Evolution means the evolving and changing of any species throughout time and there is no problem with evolution. People have problem with what falls in the category of species. If you keep humans out of it then it is a theory that is perfect. Evolution is an obvious fact that is staring us in the face. “Evolution, of course, is not something that simple applies to life here on earth; it applies to the whole universe.[1]” This quote very nicely implies that nothing in this world escapes evolution. Not even evolution itself, not its definitions and certainly not its literature. Evolution is tied with time and change. If we agree to time and change then we cannot deny evolution. Evolution cannot even escape itself.  The concept of evolution and its application itself has been modified over time by different people. Evolution and literature could be separated as different categories but it does not make sense, because evolution is tied with the essence of all the literature that we have.

I would like to explain this better by using the example of the opposing stories of belief that we have which is the biblical story of creation and the story of our random existence that evolution is.  As I said before people jumped to taking sides and trying to prove one story over the other. But they do not realize all they are engaging in is evolution itself- the evolution of the literature of the texts relating to evolution. This, I think, is the irony that evolution helps create in our life.  All the stories around us part of all the literature that has been written. Every piece of literature has definitely been written by a human. Humans only have the power as a collective to pass off a simple story as something divine.

 The two stories that have been at opposing ends for such a long time now are just stories that function at a different level. Evolution takes every little change in species into consideration, Bible doesn’t do that. No religious text that focuses on the larger picture delves into details and that is why they require a large amount of faith whereas evolution is smaller and personal and thus requires more facts than blind faith. Evolution demands evidence. This is one reason why bible is more accepted than the origin of species because it is easier to like having something to believe than not having anything to believe in.

 The two stories are just different stories with different perspectives which should not have to confront each other. This dispute between the two literatures has also evolved over time. First the dispute tilted more towards the supposedly blasphemous nature of evolution which angered the church. So, before it was one man’s story versus the church. Later, the dispute demanded the proof for both the stories. The science wanted proof of God while the religion wanted proof of actual “human” evolution. Now, the focus has shifted on which of these stories should be a part of school curriculums. The dispute will change tomorrow for sure, so, we already know that even though we can deny evolution for living beings, we cannot deny evolution in every other aspect of our lives. No one should deny that the literature has evolved and so has the argument between the literatures concerning evolution.

Evolution is a term, just like gravity. It cannot be denied and refuting it does not make it go away. If Isaac Newton had not discovered the concept of gravity, we would not be floating in the air, despite what some people think. It is the same with evolution except people here try to negate it because it was discovered. Just because someone, someone human, realized that evolution happens, does not mean that it can be put up for discussion and refuted. Discussing evolution will not stop it from happening.

Every single thing’s essence involves evolution and putting anything at odds with evolution is against the essence of that thing that has been put against evolution. For example, there was an old testament and now there is a new testament. This is proof of the evolution of literature. Literature is always being edited and added and changed. Each story gets a little modified as time passes. If this is wrong then why do we have so many editions of just one story? If it is a divine word then how does its length or language make a difference? If it is divine then shouldn’t everyone be born with the knowledge of that language? This is something that the anti- evolution groups ignore.

The creation stories need faith from the people to make them true while evolution doesn’t really need to have people believe in it to give it any credit. It is the truth and just because it has been told as a story does not mean it is unreliable. Everything in this world demands approval from people. If the majority of people think that a particular song is good then it is. If the majority thinks that creationism is right then it is. If the majority thinks that God is an old man walking the clouds then he is!

People chose to believe in the Bible and Quran and other religious texts. Then they multiplied their forces so that they outnumber the other group and make their story live and have the other die out. They completely fit the phrase “survival of the fittest” which is what evolution is about and then tried to deny evolution itself. Tables turned in such an ironical way that all the religious texts became one and evolution the other one. This too being a part of evolution is undeniable but it has been denied and still is. Evolution is taking place in the literature which tries to beat evolution. All the religious literature demands faith in order to outdo evolution but they do not realize that trying to get rid of evolution is like trying to get rid of itself. Fighting with evolution is fighting with its own essence which is contradictory to the nature of anything. All the literature is going to keep evolving and no one cans stop it. Our stories have evolved even if we do not acknowledge evolution itself. Yesterday the Bible meant a lot, today On origin of species does, tomorrow Hitchhiker's Guide to the galaxy will.

If enough people started believing in the story of the Hitchhiker’s guide to the galaxy, then it would become the new “true” story. It would replace Bible and Quran as true in the majority’s eyes. Those stories would fade out and this one would be venerated and then this story’s time would be up and be replaced by another.  This is a never ending process called evolution which has been denied vehemently and probably will continue to be denied for a very long time. The story that we choose to believe instead of the biblical one is not the point of discussion here but whether the story that we choose to believe will always be an anti-evolution one? Will we never see our literature as an evolving species and continue to push ourselves deeper into the vortex of denial till we reach a point where we have completely blinded ourselves?





[1] Quote by John Polkinghorne


Paul Grobstein's picture

discussing and evolving

"Discussing evolution will not stop it from happening."

Interesting point indeed.   And discussing stories will not keep them from changing, right?  Maybe discussion can facilitate both? 




Steven Holls's picture

Evolution vs Creation

Hi im Steven. Im 17! And im about to put your article to shame. This article of absolutely insane. I urge you to go look up polystrate fossils. You say it takes more faith to believe in Creation than it does to believe evolution. Go look up polystrate fossils. Because in fact there is more evidence for Creation than you could even imagine. Im using these fossils as an example. Evolutionist believe that every layer of the earths crust was formed over millions of years. Well how interesting! Because a polystrate fossil goes straight through several layers of the earths crust! Such as a tree! Amazing! So according to the insane people, oops! I mean evolutionist...their saying that each piece of that tree thats in a different rock layer formed idividually over millions of years...oh okay, that makes sense if you dont think about when wanted a puppy at first i got his tall. A million years later I got a couple nubs that look like back legs, then the abdomen started to evolve...see where Im going with this? Evolutionists are whack man!! They know theres a God, they just reject him. Because they wanna live there lives there way. And Christians do the same thing dont get me wrong! Its just in the end we have someone to go to when we mess up. We're gonna go somewhere when we die. Whether people want to believe it or not. There is a God. No matter how many ideas man comes up with to try to escape it the fact. God is still God. Im 17. Were not dumb. We can see right through the lies of this world...and we laugh. Mankind will never be able to fix mankinds problems...because you cant fix a problem with the source of the problem. Man is depraved and corrupt. And we need redemption from the Creator. God. We need to get back to worshiping the Creator, not the created...