At a time when theories of evolution are undergoing renewed controversy and
Darwinism is once again being challenged, discussion is hampered by the
remoteness of the phenomenon of evolution, and the use of indirect inference
to speculate about something that has never been observed. In the face of
much criticism from religious Creationists, adherents of Darwinism often
defend textbook versions of the theory that have, in any case, often been
held in question. This debate, close now to a cultural bifurcation rending
the school system, is quite misleading for it is over closed alternatives,
and hears nothing from the many criticisms from science itself. The major
news media are hostage to the received view, and seem unable to air the least
second opinion.
The assumption that evolution occurs, and must occur, at random is the crux
of the dispute, and one unreasonably confused with issues of religion and
secularization. The rise of molecular biology shows a complexity of structure
that cannot easily survive statistical challenges to claims of random
emergence. Despite massive denial, the verdict is probably final. The
Darwinian view of evolution is in full retreat and effectively dead.
Now much secular thought from historiography to politics and sociology is
caught off guard to find itself on theoretical quicksand. Where did so much
science go wrong? Defenders of Darwin often demand an alternative, thinking
none exist. But this is simply not the case. Darwinism had its own agenda,
and deflected attention from more realistic approaches, to human history at
least. The debate is stuck in the nineteenth century.
This study of the so-called Eonic Effect can break the deadlock by looking at
world history in the light of 'evolution', to discover a nonrandom master
pattern beginning to emerge. We live in the first generations in history with
sufficient perspective and archaeological data to see this derandomizing of
history. The term 'random' is very ambiguous, but seems to imply the absence
of any long-range structure. We take as our prime objective to show that this
claim of randomness is not true of human history, that there exists a
long-range 'pattern of universal history' as nonrandom emergentist evolution.
the process challenge the social sciences to more than the derivative
scientism enforced by a century of misinformed evolutionary thinking.
World History and the Eonic Effect
Civilization, Darwinism, and Theories of Evolution
By John Landon
On the Web: http://members.aol.com/eonixweb1/links/index.htm
Publisher: Xlibris Books, May 1999 Available soon from: Amazon.com