If evolution is true, then why do we love?
Imagine a system in nature in which individual components can move about and interact with other individual components in a blind, meaningless process of consuming air and food. All the components exist for no reason; they just happened to have appeared in time in close proximity.
In our imagined system each component finds its self in a vast cosmos, wandering about consuming air and food at the expense of another, even another who will die because of its consumption. Eventually, every component will die, but some will survive to reproduce first. And the consuming of air and food continues.
In our imagined system all the individual components bang about their allotted place in time because that’s where the atoms landed. No component cares; caring is not part of the system. Each just is. Living and dying without reason or remorse. Because there is no reason, and what is remorse in an accidental cosmos?
If evolution is true, then our imagined system is not imagined, it is reality. Each of us is one of the “components” of the system and we exist without reason. To use the term “person” for components like us is merely a convenient convention. In reality we are, like star dust, nothing ultimately special; we merely exist as a different conglomeration of atoms in motion.
Our purposeless existence as people-components of the cosmos seems at odds, however, with our lived experience in reality. In an evolutionary system that supposedly allocates limited amounts of air and food to the fittest among us via natural selection, we find caring.
Where would caring arise among those struggling to survive in a system of mindless resource-consuming atom-bags? There is no evolutionary basis for caring among competing selfish gene carriers. And certainly there is no basis for love.
Why is love even a word among the components of our supposedly evolutionary system we call “humans?” How is love even a thing in a cosmos that values nothing but survival?
Remember the T-shirts back in the day that said, “Love is the answer, what’s the question?” Well, modern science has turned that around, and for every question, the answer now is “evolution.” Because today, regardless the question about why we observe anything in nature, the answer always is and must be “evolution.”
Wear your T-shirts proudly, evolutionists: “Evolution is the answer, what’s the question?”
But we are left with a nagging question: Why do humans love?
Is evolution really the answer? Of course, we hear all the contrived attempts to explain the “evolutionary basis for love” that evolutionists proffer. Societal good, attraction of a mate, good of the family, blah, blah, blah, and blah.
These answers seem contrived because they are contrived. All the reasons given directly contradict the theory of evolution.
Why do humans love?
The answer is not evolution. Love is an unexplainable anomaly if evolution is true.
But love can be real if evolution is merely a contrived creation story devoid of fact, and used only because the other option points to a living, creative, God.
How is God even a word among the components of our system we call “humans?”
Think about it.