Can freedom exist the way we believe it does in America? Is man capable of such freedom without it leading to absolute chaos? These are questions, that whether people realize it or not, are guiding the direction of our nation. John Adams said our constitution was adequate only for, a moral and religious people. This meant that the restrictions on government influence over men’s behavior were put in place because it was the belief in God, and a higher morality based on natural law, that would ultimately, govern the conduct of men. The founders believed that man, having a morality grounded in religion, could self-govern, possess arms, freely oppose their government, and conduct their everyday affairs because they were governed by God and not man. The belief in man’s free will, and his ability to make moral choices, has been the foundation of freedom in America since its founding and continues to be the driving argument in defending the principle of liberty.
What happens when it is no longer believed that man can make moral choices on his own? What happens when the belief in free will and a universal morality is questioned, and man is made to appear as nothing more than another animal? An animal who is easily controlled through stimulus-response mechanisms, which science would claim, prove that free will is nonexistent? The natural inclinations of man would be unleashed and there would be a need to reign in man’s freedom because it would lead to nothing less than a dangerous and chaotic society where at any moment, for any reason, ordinary people can just snap and commit mass murder. Welcome to a world governed by science, where God doesn’t exist, free will is a myth, and man is no different than an ape.
What does it mean to be governed by science? If applied correctly, and with proper intentions, the scientific method can be used to explain many truths of the natural world. Science has brought us many advancements in technology and medicine, making it possible for people to live longer, healthier lives. What happens when science is used to study man’s behavior? Science is used as a means of gaining control and understanding of the natural world, or at the very least, understanding the natural order; therefore, it would be safe to assume that a science of behavior would be used to gain control over the minds and behaviors of human beings.
This is a reality many do not want to face. The implications are too great, and the consequences, are far-reaching. The idea that we are not in control of our choices or behaviors is one that frightens most people because we put great stock into our own cognitive abilities and moral fortitude. The idea of science dictating, or predicting behavior brings into question the existence of a higher power in the minds of those seeking to understand the nature of human beings. Unfortunately, this has been the dominant viewpoint governing the study of behavior since Pavlov conducted his infamous experiments in the early twentieth century. According to the book Battle for the Mind, by William Sargent, Pavlov’s discovery that man’s physiological response to fear and stress was no different than a dog’s, set the stage for the medical community across the globe to be reorientated to reflect these beliefs. In other words, medical science has been viewing man through the lens of stimulus-response psychology for more than a century. One of Pavlov’s key findings, which no doubt is still being applied to this day, is that behavior can be changed and guided after exposure to high levels of trauma.
B.F. Skinner took Pavlov’s theories to a new level. He defined what a science of human behavior should be, and how a working model of studying behavior effectively, should be developed. In Science and Human Behavior, he states that there is no point in pursuing a science of nature unless the focus is primarily on human nature. Understanding the nature of behavior will inevitably lead, Skinner writes, “to widely used results for purposes of control.” A science of behavior, and an understanding of how to guide and control it, according to Skinner, will ultimately bring order to human affairs. Whereas Pavlov’s theories revolved around a physiological response to a stimulus; for example, the dog drooling at the sound of a bell because the bell was rung every time the dog was fed, Skinner discovered that stimulus-response programming could be environmental. Meaning people’s behaviors could be controlled by manipulating the environment.
“Prevailing philosophies of human nature recognize an internal “will” which has the power of interfering with causal relationships and which makes the prediction and control of behavior impossible. To suggest that we abandon this view is to threaten many cherished beliefs—to undermine what appears to be a stimulating and productive conception of human nature.” (Skinner, 1956)
Skinner stated that science cannot be applied to an organism that is believed to act on its own will because there would be no way to apply effective controls. When studying human behavior, assuming that people can choose for themselves limits universal conclusions because there are too many variables that can affect the results. To effectively develop a science of behavior means discounting the idea of free will, and assuming that there is an existing order that governs how we behave. This order, Skinner believed, was environmental. Human beings must adapt to environmental circumstances in order to survive, period. Manipulating the environment means controlling behavior. This philosophy threatens the traditional view of man and the idea that he is free to choose his own behavior or make his own choices. Suggesting that our behavior is the result of environmental circumstances is to suggest that we are no different than any other animal.
Where is this going? If Christian morality was thought to be the guiding force behind liberty and the ability for man to make choices on his own accord, what happens when that morality is destroyed? Are the public schools teaching a Christian-based morality or the lie of Darwinism? Just as Pavlov’s theories were adopted by medical science across the world to explain man’s physiological responses, Darwin’s theories became the defining explanation for the origins of man. Darwin, according to Skinner, put man in his proper biological place. Meaning that man’s designation as an animal is more accurate than suggesting we are spiritual beings. Again, assigning man the value of free thought takes away the validity of behavioral science because there would be too many variables to account for. When free thought and self-control are eliminated from the equation, behavior can then be classified, manipulated, and wrapped up in a nice little controllable package.
Darwinism provided the opportunity to redefine what type of morality should be governing man because evolution proved, in their minds, that God simply did not exist. According to a book called The Moral Implications of Darwinism, by James Rachel, the science of evolution would evolve to the point where men were enlightened enough to no longer need God, and theism itself would no longer hold any credibility. Haven’t we reached that point? Hasn’t the Christian religion been attacked, discredited, and labeled as a hateful, bigoted ideology for years now?
People can say that science has replaced God in modern America. A more accurate way to say this would be that scientists have destroyed God so that they can create a society in their own image. The truth is that psychology itself, the study of human behavior, and those charged with its implementation deliberately discard the existence of God because he is antithetical to their aims. The control over man’s behavior. The Christian worldview is blamed for nearly all the world’s ailments and psychiatry and psychology have been set up as the cure. According to a paper entitled The Psychiatry of Enduring Peace and Social Progress, which was presented to the World Health Organization by Canadian psychiatrist, Brock Chisholm, the number one cause of aggression and poverty in the world was morality and the belief in a universal right and wrong.
“The false belief that there is a universal right and wrong is the primary cause of all fear, guilt, and feelings of inferiority that cause people the need to control other’s behaviors and beliefs. It is the conviction of truth as a universal concept that prevents maturity and rational thinking, and bowing down to the doctrine of sin and the existence of evil, which has prevented true progress. Religious belief is a dogma that prevents men from reasoning and enjoying their inclination to follow their natural urges. (Chisholm, 1946)
Chisholm also wrote that the very purpose of psychology or psychotherapy is to eradicate and reinterpret the basic concepts of right and wrong in school children. He states that elementary education should be working alongside the field of psychiatry to do away with such prejudices and reinforce new ideas through what he referred to as the sciences of living. Freeing men to enjoy their inclination to follow their natural urges goes a long way in describing the type of sexual perversion we are seeing manifest in society today. It kills God in the soul of men and tells them that freedom means the right to do as one wishes with no fear of consequence as opposed to being free to be responsible for ourselves. Something that science and psychology would argue we are incapable of.
As we see the world around us continue to descend into chaos – increasing violence, loss of value for human life, and the redefinition of human biology, many people rightly recognize it is the absence of God creating these problems. If you are familiar with the Marxist concept of the Hegelian Dialectic, or the problem-reaction-solution strategy, then you could reasonably argue that Christian morality was deliberately destroyed, so that man would fall into an immoral state. Freed from the dogma of religious morality men not only follow but act in their natural urges unimpeded by any sense of wrongdoing. This gives those behind the scenes, the psychologists now viewing us as nothing but a stimulus-response organism no different than a snail, the justification to implement their controls to bring order to a world in disarray. Lawlessness is deliberately created by those who despise God because he stands in the way of their ambitions for dominion over the human mind. The fear of societal collapse makes the acceptance of further control almost guaranteed as most people simply want the semblance of a normal, easy life. They will gladly surrender their freedom for the false illusions of safety and security.
If you enjoyed this article please consider reading these as well.
Fear-Based Persuasion, Propaganda, and an Invasion from Mars – In Defense of Our Nation
Darwinism, Gun Control and Abortion: A Loss of Value for Human Life – In Defense of Our Nation
