History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

Why are Darwinists ignoring the Axial Age?

March 4th, 2007 · No Comments

The previous post on the question of religion and evolution might be complemented with a discussion of the issue of the Axial Age.

All this effort to decipher the origins of religion in the evolution of early hominids onwards is blind to the obvious: we have direct historical evidence of the way in which religion evolves, visible in the spectacular synchronous advance in culture in the Axial period. This era produces a broad spectrum of effects, one part of which is the emergence of two world religions. This data has been completely ignored by mainstream science as they pursue the reductionist fallacies generated from the futile effort to impose physics basics on all branches of human knowledge. This ostrich mindset is almost ludicrous if the evidence of religious evolution stands in bald grandeur right in our historical backyard. Part of the problem is the complexity of the analysis of something as vast as this Axial period (the study of the eonic effect provides an effective way to approach this complexity). And this data has been equally disowned by religious groups nervously attempting to grasp their position in the larger context of religion and civilization over the past five thousand years.
Basically we can see that ‘religion’ (a dangerous term) is bound up in macro-evolutionary dynamics and operates on a stupendous global scale.
The Axial Age will also remind us of the fact that ‘religion’ as a category is relative, since we see the Axial effect manifest itself as clearly in the emergence of philosophy and science.
Darwinists are the especial culprits in this suppression of the clearest and best evidence of the evolution of religion.

Here the tools used in studying the eonic effect are essential if one is to separate the two levels on which this ‘evolution’ is occurring, and this is what drives people away from the phenomenon seen in the Axial period. We confused the surface with the deeper dynamic. In the eonic model this is expressed as the contrast of ‘eonic determination’ and ‘free action’, which allows us to see that the dynamic is one thing, the realization quite another. The form that monotheism took as it emerged into history is related to the factor of ‘free action’, while the larger context is that of eonic determination. See the material at history-and-evolution.com.

Tags: Evolution · Science & Religion · The Axial Age · The Eonic Effect

0 responses so far ↓

  • There are no comments yet...Kick things off by filling out the form below.

Leave a Comment