This Dark Age

A manual for life in the modern world.

By Daniel Schwindt

NOTICE:
This Dark Age is now available in paperback on Amazon. The print version is MUCH cleaner than this online version, which is largely unedited and has fallen by the wayside as the project has grown. If you’ve appreciated my writing, please consider leaving a review on the relevant paperback volumes. The print edition also includes new sections (Military History, War Psychology, Dogmatic Theology).

Volume 1 | Volume 2 | Volume 3| Volume 4 | Volume 5 | Volume 6

The need for cosmology

A grounding in cosmology would go a long way toward resolving many of the debates that spring up between ‘science and religion.’ The argument about the origins of man and of species in general is one of these debates. As is often the case, the opposition between the two views is irreconcilable mostly because the question itself is improperly framed. They each misunderstand the nature and the limitations of the means they employ to carry out their investigations. Evolutionists attempt to deal with problems of origins through empirical methods; creationists attempt to address it through a literalistic interpretation of Scripture. Neither of these approaches is capable of providing a clear understanding of the problem, because the problem is a metaphysical one and metaphysics is alien to both of these groups.

In other words, although both possess a means of exploring the question, the means are limited, although in different ways. By misunderstanding these limits, they deploy their means improperly and so arrive at absurd conclusions. It would be more accurate, in fact, to say that the knowledge provided by these means will always be, on this particular question, inconclusive. Since that is unacceptable to both parties, they draw conclusions anyway, and these wind up being nothing but the result of their own imaginings. On this point we can at least say for science that it proves itself artistic and even poetic in its delusions; the creationists, on the other hand, seem to have no poetic sense whatsoever, set as they are on reducing the significance of their own Scriptures to the level of children’s storybooks. The two parties in this debate have perhaps gone to these extremes in response to one another, allowing their mutual incomprehension to push them beyond the bounds of good judgement.

Share This