In this blog post, we’ll examine the scientific debates and religious misunderstandings surrounding the theory of evolution, as well as how it should be taught and learned in schools.
Is the theory of evolution actually correct? Or is it wrong? It has been over 160 years since the publication of Charles Darwin’s ‘On the Origin of Species’, which can be considered one of the starting points of evolutionary theory. However, there are still numerous debates among scholars regarding the specific mechanisms that explain evolution and biological diversity, as well as the various aspects of evolution itself. This is clearly illustrated by the contrast between the theory of punctuated equilibrium and the theory of gradualism, as well as the debates surrounding them involving figures such as Richard Dawkins and Stephen Jay Gould. Of course, this does not diminish the value of the theory of evolution. Scientific progress begins with such mutual opposition, rebuttal, and the resulting arguments. Observing this process will also help us cultivate the scientific mindset we hope to instill in future generations. This is precisely why the theory of evolution is regarded as one of the greatest discoveries in human thought. Evolutionary theory has not yet fully resolved all its detailed issues, nor has it been conclusively settled. However, the very fact that we can study evolutionary theory and its history allows us to gain insight into how modern scholarship has developed and prompts us to reflect on the scientific methodology that forms the foundation of most academic disciplines. In this regard, the theory of evolution—a prime example of how a new body of knowledge has been built on the basis of reason and argumentation in opposition to the religious dogmatism, blind faith, and anti-intellectualism that have long dominated humanity—is a subject that more people should learn about.
However, while the theory of evolution carries considerable theoretical weight, its social influence can be considered relatively limited. In academia, the theory of evolution has influenced a wide range of fields, including biology, medicine, agriculture, and ecology. However, because the individual influence of non-religious people and those who accept the theory of evolution is very strong, even though the voices of both sides may appear to be given similar weight in the media, books, and on the internet, the actual situation is not necessarily the same. That said, there is a significant discrepancy between past statistics and the current reality in this regard. According to recent comprehensive global estimates of the religious population, as of 2020, 75.8% of the world’s population belonged to a religious group, while 24.2% were classified as having no religion. Therefore, while it is true that the majority of the world’s population is still affiliated with a religion, the figure of 88% cited in the past does not align with the latest estimates. In the United States as well, the number of people who do not believe in any religion has increased significantly compared to the past. A 2026 survey found that 28% of U.S. adults reported having no religious affiliation, while 40% identified as Protestant, 21% as Catholic, and 9% as belonging to other religions. In South Korea, too, the proportion of people with no religious affiliation is quite high. A 2025 Korea Research survey showed that 20% identified as Protestant, 16% as Buddhist, 11% as Catholic, 1% as other religions, and 51% as having no religion. Therefore, rather than simply defining today’s world as a “planet of believers,” it is more accurate to view it as a society where religion continues to exert significant global influence, while the proportion of people without a religious affiliation has been steadily increasing.
Consequently, the theory of evolution is often—indeed, quite frequently—plagued by false claims and misunderstandings. In particular, when criticizing the theory of evolution, some present arguments that are either unrelated to it or have already been refuted by the scientific community as if they were part of the theory itself. Such misunderstandings must be distinguished from rational criticism of the theory of evolution.
Such claims have been repeatedly circulated through materials from certain large religious organizations and on the internet. Claims such as “Why don’t monkeys become humans and come down from the mountains?” or “Evolutionary theory claims that all living things evolved from amoebas” do not accurately describe the content of modern evolutionary biology. Whether religious individuals advocate for creationism, intelligent design, or claim that the Flying Spaghetti Monster created dwarves or Neanderthals, these positions may fall within the realm of personal belief or satire. However, we must refute any distortion of scientific facts. What is important in the debate surrounding the theory of evolution is not to attack the beliefs of a specific religion, but to distinguish between scientific claims and religious beliefs and to accurately understand what science actually says.
There is even a possibility that such misunderstandings could be perpetuated in educational settings. In the past, religious private schools in South Korea—so-called “mission schools”—played a significant role in the education system, and debates surrounding religious education and students’ religious freedom have persisted. Historical educational records also show that a considerable number of religious-affiliated secondary schools existed, and the issue of requiring students to participate in religious education or events against their will has been a social controversy. However, today, the question of how to harmonize students’ religious freedom with the school’s right to educate is a more important issue than the mere existence of religious schools. It is also true that organizations such as the self-proclaimed “Creation Science Society” have been conveying claims related to creationism or intelligent design to students through various channels, including schools and the internet. However, when such claims are presented as scientific explanations, they must be evaluated based on the criteria of scientific evidence and testability. Similarly, the teaching of evolution should not simply be a matter of forcing students to believe in a specific theory; rather, it should be conducted in a way that helps them understand the evidence for evolution and the process of scientific reasoning.
This underscores the importance of distinguishing between religious beliefs and scientific knowledge. If asked why I use such strong language, I would say that even a brief search online for materials surrounding the theory of evolution and creationism reveals just how fiercely these opposing claims clash. Of course, not all religious people reject the theory of evolution, and there are many who accept both their religious beliefs and the theory of evolution. In fact, there is no need to view science and religion as necessarily incompatible; it is entirely possible to maintain religious faith while accepting the theory of evolution.
Simply pointing out that there are people who do not hold such views does not make the problem go away. Conversely, it is also inaccurate to generalize that all religious people reject the theory of evolution. What matters is not collectively defining one side or the other, but examining each argument based on scientific claims and factual evidence. The notion that debating claims that defy common sense or are not grounded in sound reasoning is not a matter of urgency may also be an overly optimistic and naive view. From the outset, this is not an issue that can be viewed merely as a simple “debate.” It is a conflict between explanations grounded in scientific evidence and claims that distort the facts; it is also a question of how to respond to situations where misinformation is repeatedly disseminated by exploiting religious authority or social influence. If there are those who spread falsehoods and seek to reinforce spurious authority under the guise of religion, should science remain silent simply because they are wearing the mask of religion?
Where should we begin to resolve this contradiction? A good starting point would be school education. In schools—the places where future generations are nurtured—teaching must be grounded in rational and logical thinking, ensuring the public nature and transparency of education without infringing on students’ religious freedom. It is crucial to correct any instances where specific doctrines are unilaterally instilled based on religious or dogmatic thinking, or where the authority of education is used to force specific beliefs upon students. Rather than advocating for the blanket nationalization of all religious private schools, as in the past, a more realistic approach would be to establish institutional mechanisms that simultaneously guarantee the autonomy of private schools, the fundamental rights of students, and the public nature of education. Education does not end there. Even when teaching the theory of evolution, the process should not be limited to simple indoctrination—such as stating “so-and-so made this claim,” “this photograph illustrates the evolutionary process of a certain organism,” or “this chart should be interpreted this way.” Students must be able to think for themselves about why these debates arose, what evidence and logical implications underlie them, and, ultimately, what constitutes true knowledge and science. The true meaning of learning about the theory of evolution lies not simply in memorizing the conclusion that evolution occurred, but in learning the scientific way of thinking—explaining natural phenomena based on a wealth of evidence, critically examining existing explanations, and seeking better ones.
