I first saw Jon McNaughton’s painting, One Nation Under God, in 2009 when it was just becoming popular. It was more than popular in the area where I live; it was important to people with rather strong conservative political opinions and with very negative opinions about science as it applies to humans and especially as it applies to biological evolution and very especially as it applies to the evolution of humans. Mr. McNaughton holds a BFA [Bachelor of Fine Arts] from BYU [Brigham Young University] and lives in Spanish Fork, Utah. By his own statement, he created the painting inspired by a vision he received during the 2008 elections which resulted in a shift to the left of which he disapproved. The painting depicts Jesus Christ surrounded by actual historical characters from American history, and symbolic characters who serve as archetypes: On the left there are Satan, a liberal news reporter who obviously represents the distortion of news away from the religious and political right, a handicapped child, a smirking professor fondly turning the pages of Charles Darwin’s book, the Origin of the Species, a remorseful Supreme Court justice crying over his court’s Roe v. Wade decision with a pregnant woman hovering nearby in the corner set aside for Satan. On the good side of Christ are such notables as Ronald Reagan and James Madison, and archetypes including a noble farmer, a Christian minister, a U.S. Marine, a handicapped child, a black college student, a schoolteacher who has some resemblance to the former ultraconservative vice-presidential candidate, Sarah Palin, and a young white male who represents the rising generation who aspires to set things right.
McNaughton is a superb artist; his religious paintings are excellent and evocative. Any Christian home would feel comfortable and uplifted by hanging any one of them on the wall. The details in McNaughton’s works and the symbolism portrayed in them–and especially in One Nation Under God–are serious art. One Nation Under Godis more than that. It is a religious and political statement of opinion, an opinion shared by perhaps the majority of Americans. The United States is the world’s most religious country by many standards of comparison. On his web site, Mr. McNaughton speaks of the immigrant in the picture holding his hand in the air, “I wanted him to have a look of shock when he realizes where the source of America’s greatness comes from as he sees Christ holding the Constitution.” He goes on to make the following statement about the inclusion of Charles Darwin’s theory in the company of Satan. He says, “Yes, I have read the book and yes I do believe in many of the theories it espouses. What?! No, I don’t think the book should be burned and kicked out of the school curriculum. Some of the rebuttals I have heard in regard to this subject in my painting are unfounded. I believe that this book is a standard that the left uses to push Christianity out of the Educational Forum. I believe that we need faith in our schools. I believe that I did not evolve from an ape. You may disagree…”
I have no argument with Mr. McNaughton’s right to express his opinion both in his painting and in his words. However, I do have a concern about the concept that the theory of evolution is evil or somehow an anti-religious notion—“just a theory” as many right-wing opponents would tell you. Since Darwin published his book in 1859, a great many scholars and religious people have sought to disprove his assertions. No scientific evidence has ever been adduced that successfully challenged the theory. Multiple court battles launched by opponents have failed. The opposition to the theory of evolution has had to resort to publishing unfounded hypotheses which are unsupported by rigorous scientific evidence—the most recent being the Intelligent Design Theory. Worse, the opposition has been reduced to using inflammatory mocking rhetoric, artistic depictions evoking a sense of evil about the theory, and–more egregious–artistic caricatures. Since the theory was published in the world’s scientific literature, Charles Darwin has been portrayed as a tree-climbing anthropoid, as an ape sitting on a tree limb cuddling two apes—the latter caricature, a painting by a German artist on the occasion of Darwin’s one-hundredth birthday. Darwin has been portrayed as a monkey with Darwin’s head. He holds a mirror up to another monkey which is sitting next to him. One is led to the conclusion that the professor of biology is inviting the monkey to ponder about himself and his existence. When all else fails, all is not lost; one can still resort to name calling.
When I saw Mr. McNaughton’s painting—shown to me by an ardent admirer—I had the temerity to ask what the admirer knew about evolution. The answer then, and most of the time I ask it, is “It’s just a theory; the concept of man coming from a monkey is stupid.” The most emphatic argument I encounter is best described as the Fallacy of Personal Incredulity:“I don’t believe it; therefore, it is not true.” I concluded that these spurious arguments are examples of the certainty of ignorance. One is entitled to an opinion that differs from mine or anyone else’s, but mockery as the last resort of ignorance is hardly a compelling argument.
I would like to give a brief explanation of evolution in several subsequent blogspots because I think this concept is important, inflammatory, fascinating, and one of the fourpillars of biology—the natural world—along with the atomic theory, the cell theory, and the genetic theory of reproduction. If we are going to argue, at least we should know what the argument is about. Why should we fear knowledge?