This is an excellent example of the
False Dilemma Logical Fallacy
Though I have recently written about the false dilemma logical fallacy I believe that we should look at it again from a slightly different perspective as it is so prevalent in everyday discussions; especially in use by the media outlets to elevate their position over what they view as an opposing position.
One of the most foundational beliefs by the lost, and by both Christians and Christendom, is the religion of evolution. When it was first published the educated community nearly laughed it out of existence and it was not until the late portion of the 19th century that it came back into vogue to support the political philosophy based upon Charles Darwin’s work; of course, I speak of Social Darwinism. The above graphic is an excellent example of the false dilemma fallacy, and others also. Ms Hayes equates the teaching of creationism, as opposed to evolution, akin to teaching that children come from storks rather than biological reproduction. True science has laid the foundation which she calls biological reproduction which has been reconfirmed countless times making it nearly unassailable which negates the old children’s tale that babies were delivered by storks. This is then forced onto the discussion of evolution versus creationism to equate creationism with the stork theory. The reader is forced into the conclusion that if creationism is akin to the stork theory, and no one believes that to be true, then of course any educated person would reject creationism in favor of evolution, which purports to be scientific by the association with the biological theory of reproduction.
Be careful to not confuse False Dilemma
with the Law of Excluded Middle
The false dilemma flies under several labels as depicted by the above graphic but at its core there are always only two choices when in fact there are more than two choices. The Excluded Middle law is also either-or when in fact there are only two choices while the debtor seeks to introduce additional choices. The Bible states that one is either saved or lost; there is no middle choice, no shades of gray. This is an example of excluded middle. Another example would be: A person is either alive or dead; they cannot be both alive and dead {sorry, no zombie apocalypse}. An example of the false dilemma fallacy: The light is either on or off. However, while there is only one state of off, no power, there may be several or many states of on {dimmer switch comes to mind}. The questioner asks questions in such a manner as to present only an either-or answer when in fact other answers may be more correct. Falling into the false dilemma puts one on the horns of a dilemma since either answer can be used to discredit the position of the person answering the question.
Example of the Horns of a Dilemma
False Dilemma Fallacy Trap
Let us get back to our original discussion of evolution versus creationism. Evolution is according to the Wikipedia article is a series of mutations resulting in incremental changes in a species {There are a lot of long words and we are not but simple folks but this is the basics of the definition}. What is not stated but actually implied is that mutations are necessarily random, unpredictable, and therefore isolated. For instance, the human clotting system has a 13-step pathway in forming and removing blood clots. Miss any single factor and the organism would bleed to death before birth. All thirteen factors {steps} must be present which means that the systems that manufacture and control these factors must also be present simultaneously for the clotting process to be beneficial; i.e., not result in death. There are many such irreducible systems in place even down to the flagella of certain one-celled organisms. Yet, by definition a random process cannot result in positive organized change since it is, well, random. Any changes will only result in negative consequences which is what we see when people are born with genetic defects {mutations} {Sorry, X-Men but the mutation theory is DOA}.
So, why does public education only allow the teaching of evolution and discredit creationism as a return to the Dark Ages of Ignorance? Well, evolution implies that God is not needed and therefore man can pretend that God does not exist. No matter how you pretty up a pig and bring it to a party…it is still a pig and will do pig things {not pretty}. No matter how many big words you throw into the discussion of evolution it does not make evolution a science. The calling of evolution a science actually turns a belief into a pseudoscience of gobbledygook that sounds intelligent but cannot hold up to actual observation and measurement; thus, evolution relies on the extensive use of logical fallacies to prove it is a legitimate science {there are several other “respectable” disciplines that do the same and are also pseudosciences}. By controlling what is taught the government via the public school system develops an anti-God worldview in children who are then susceptible to accepting other beliefs predicated upon evolution.
Creationism, by definition, relies solely on God as the Creator; thus, God does exist. If God exists then the truth of man’s sin and need for a Savior also exists. This forces lost man to either repent and seek God’s gracious gift of salvation or pretend that God does not exist. The lost will never of their own accord accept the truth of God. I did not when I was lost and I even taught Bible and Jesus while not understanding anything about repentance. The 20th century in Western culture has abounded in teaching vast numbers of people that the universe exists without God and that man in his evolutionary upward climb with someday come to a more advanced form {though it neglects to address what happens to all those who died along the way without reaching that advanced form–“too bad”!}. Creationism looks at the very same facts, often using the same methods, but in a different context arriving at the conclusion that God is the author. Since creationists conclusions cannot be refuted, except by refuting their methods which evolutionists also use, the evolutionists resort to logical fallacies such as the false dilemma. Since many people are not taught any forms of logical reasoning these techniques work: even at the university and advance degree programs!
As Christians we do not simple “rest on the Bible”. The God presented in the Bible is clearly reasonable and not random or else man would not have learned what he did in the last several hundred years using science {observation and repeatability}. During the Enlightenment man posited a logical Creator, though not necessarily the God of the Bible, and made amazing discoveries that early man could not have made because they viewed the world as random and therefore unknowable. Thus, we learn of God from the Bible and look at His creation seeing His logical handiwork as well as that which remains beyond our ability to even comprehend {such as what is heat?} (Ps 19:1-6). We do not counter with logical fallacies of our own nor do we return scoffing with scoffing. We continue to do right knowing that we will give an account to Him when we stand before Him (2Co 5:10) as they must give an account to Him they denied when they stand before Him (Re 20:11-15). We take no pleasure in their fate because neither does God who is our example in all things (Ez 33:11). Amen.