Religion and Science
1. The Method of Argument
~ 14 ~
event from which God’s non-existence had been
inferred.
I contend that this method of argument, which in
modern times has been considered sufficiently valid
to reject religion, is actually the greatest proof of its
veracity. The fault does not lie in the principle of the
argument but in its application. When correctly
applied, the result will be quite the contrary.
Now let us turn from the negative application of
this criterion to the positive. This same criterion has
been applied supportively to organic evolution, and
the latter has been accepted so fully in the modern
world that it has affected all branches of
knowledge. The truth of organic evolution cannot
be proved by the first, second or third criterion. The
‘proof of its truth can be based only on the fourth
criterion, i.e. it is considered the best working
hypothesis.
Yet in the eyes of the modern world, organic
evolution is a ‘scientific fact’. The writers of
Science
of Life
assert that ‘No one now denies the truth of
organic evolution except for those who are ignorant,
or biased or superstitious’. The Modern Pocket
