An Examined Ideology
Biology is a science. Woke is an ideology. Biology cannot be Woke, because science is not an end - science is a process of asking questions, testing and measuring, and then asking further questions. Woke cannot be scientific because it is an assertion that won’t allow itself to be challenged – the polar opposite of science.
But an ideology is not mutually exclusive of science, because science can hypothesize an ideology as true or false, and chase down the results. If the data supports the veracity of the ideology, it is very possible that the next set of data disproves it. Like all good science, if enough data supports it, that still doesn’t make it true, because we all know how a funding source can impact the results – or bury them.
The thing about science is, that few ideologies are ever proven true. Most ideologies can only be proven false – take evolution as a prime example. If the hypothesis is that human life arrived on the scene through a series of random mutations, that could be put to various tests. All of those tests would involve collecting data – and I would expect that the most reviewed datapoints would be an innumerable amount of false starts.
NOT TRUE:
If individual members of one species actually jumped away from their homeostasis as a mindless happenstance – randomly and without having a goal or a guarantee of survival, as did another of the opposite gender at the same time, with their offspring living long enough to procreate with the offspring of another couple of weirdness that randomly mutated in the same way at the same time - arriving to the point where we have all the life that is now occupying the planet - it is reasonable to expect there to be almost nothing but skeletal missing-links scattered throughout the globe. There would be false starts in one direction, more going forward at another angle, and even more starting down some other crazy trajectory – ad infinitum. And to get to the sheer vastness of species in existence today, not to mention all of the extinct species, those accidental occurrences would have to be viable and functional – and so there would be a bazillion living, breathing inter-species still in existence that we would have to contend with. We wouldn’t have to theorize ourselves into evolution, but away from it – we would be tripping over all of the in-between species going on in the world presently, and fossilized historically. And when I remember my biology courses of yesteryear, which said that each one of those processes takes a very long time, that means evolution would have to be actively going on right now. And so I ask myself: Why don’t we see any mutations taking off, beyond simple adaptation?*
But that does sound like a fun idea for a novel, in the vein of HG Wells. I wonder if The Simpsons has done an episode on that yet? Hmmm…
Then there is the fact that humans are set apart from all the other animals. Even those who believe in the ideology of evolution acknowledge that humans are at the pinnacle of the evolutionary pyramid, even though they quibble over the details. Even still, scientists can’t imagine a biological way for our species to step further onward from where we are, but instead they foresee a technological way. Transhumanism is where they see the process going – in that we are to engineer our next evolutionary state – not that we accidentally stumble forward, as they claim all the other species have done up until now. I find that odd, and rather funny. I’m sure resistance to the proposed process will be labeled futile, much the way resistance to the Covid “vaccines” were. I hope to find even more resolve to talk like Picard and act like Janeway, as those days emerge.
FALSE:
But science can hypothesize an ideology as false, and prove it. Such as, if a person’s gender is really different from their chromosomal make-up and DNA strands, the task is to objectively measure that sum and substance, then test it. I can’t imagine a way to do that without digging deeper into the brain’s structure and development. And so my initial hypothesis would be that since even those cells are encoded with a person’s sex, they wouldn’t say anything other than what we all can easily see – Prime Ministers of New Zealand and American Supreme Court Justices, notwithstanding.
My follow-up hypothesis would be that, as they are not able to conclude that gender identity is measurably different from biological sex (they still haven’t found that ‘gay gene’ they were looking for in the ‘80’s, after all), they might instead conclude that people who think they were born in the wrong bodies are mentally ill, or developmentally a child. Of course we should check the funding sources on those studies also – the brain is rather complicated, to be sure.
But ideology is not so easily persuaded by science, no matter who funds it – just ask Fauci. People don’t easily shift away from their strongly held beliefs on account of another person declaring something passionately – just look at the label on that box of masks that we have all been forced to wear by politicians in the name of science. No, don’t do that – we’re all Woke here. We must be, or we wouldn’t have come here.
Ideology -v- History:
There are many scientists, apparently, who say that science is reasonable while faith is not. I shall hypothesize that they are using every known religion, except for Christianity – including the religion of science (science can absolutely operate as a religion – especially if it has been coopted by an ideology, or by politicians.)
I am persuaded of Christianity for many reasons. One of those reasons is that it is based on historical events that have been verified – have been exposed to scientific criticism. J. Warner Wallace wrote a book on that: Cold Case Christianity.
Christianity stands up to scrutiny. Science is, after all, “thinking God’s thoughts after Him,” according to Johannes Kepler, who was no slouch in the scientific community. His foundation was, “only and alone in the service of Jesus Christ. In Him is all refuge, all solace.”
*Adaptation creates homeostasis, and then stops. As though it was designed.