|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,915 Year: 4,172/9,624 Month: 1,043/974 Week: 2/368 Day: 2/11 Hour: 1/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Don't Believe In Evolution? Try Thinking Harder | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18351 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Don't Believe In Evolution? Try Thinking Harder
This article appeared today on NPR and is worth a gander. The article was written by Tania Lombrozo-(who) is a psychology professor at the University of California, Berkeley. She writes about psychology, cognitive science and philosophy, with occasional forays into parenting and veganism. After reading the article and considering what I got out of it, all I could say was that it caused me to think harder. My favorite sentence? quote: Edited by Phat, : added jabberwockyGod created war so that Americans would learn geography. —Mark Twain "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9516 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
The words 'I could have told you that' spring to mind.
Surely it can't be a surprise to find (the 3rd conclusion that she finds compelling) that if you're brought up in a culture of belief and anti-science, you're likely to think in the same way?Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined:
|
My take on this is that the analysis described that needs to be done to accept a non-supernatural world is harder to do than to not accept a non-supernatural world.
So when there is no compelling reason to go to the trouble to do this analysis (such as the cultural point raised or needing to do some academic research) one will carry on not accepting an intuitive version of the world. Edited by Larni, : No reason given.The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer. -Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MrHambre Member (Idle past 1423 days) Posts: 1495 From: Framingham, MA, USA Joined: |
I think the author had it right when she described the cultural factors involved in acceptance of evolution:
quote: However, when she starts exploring the psychological factors and "cognitive styles" that contribute to the degree of acceptance of evolution, she even points out the weakness of her own approach:
quote: I guess it depends on how convincing you find this sort of 21st-century phrenology. I think there's much more to be said for the way that certain communities relate to knowledge, especially knowledge that's as counter-intuitive as that which supports the theory of evolution. The problems of public education, and the reluctance of school systems to emphasize evolution by natural selection in biology curricula, provide a vast amount of soil for misunderstanding to thrive even among people who affirm the validity of species evolution. Politically, the right wing obviously has a vested interest in de-emphasizing a theory that unsettles its religious constituents. However, the specter of Social Darwinism is just as disturbing to progressives. Economically, there's a lot of money to be made in the textbook trade, and the cottage industry of anti-Darwinist literature and film can be just as lucrative as the one that put money in the pockets of celebrity debater/authors like Dawkins. Which brings me to one last cultural factor that's a stumbling block to the acceptance of species evolution: the way Darwinism has become a totem of anti-religious activism. It's a little disingenuous of us to tout the Christianity-crushing power of evolution by natural selection on one hand (and put Darwin-fish bumper stickers on our cars to taunt the fundies), then turn around and act astonished when people continue to express doubt about the construct on religious grounds. Edited by MrHambre, : Typo.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Politically, the right wing obviously has a vested interest in de-emphasizing a theory that unsettles its religious constituents. However, the specter of Social Darwinism is just as disturbing to progressives. Except that Social Darwinism is offensive BS that pretends a relation with science. Unless you are in a discussion with someone with an anti-science bent, there is no reason to let go of evolutionary theory just to dismiss Social Darwinism. On the other hand, the religious right largely forgoes any reconciliation of their views with science. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined:
|
NN writes: On the other hand, the religious right largely forgoes any reconciliation of their views with science.
Let me fix that for you. On the other hand, the religious right largely forgoes any reconciliation of their views with reality. It's not just science, it is economics, language, politics, health care, anything that in anyway conflicts with their beliefs.Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MrHambre Member (Idle past 1423 days) Posts: 1495 From: Framingham, MA, USA Joined: |
Except that Social Darwinism is offensive BS that pretends a relation with science.
I don't dispute that. However, the line cuts both ways. I think claiming that Darwinism is synonymous with atheism, or that evolution by natural selection is inherently anti-religious, is a form of pseudoscience too. Edited by MrHambre, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8564 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
I think claiming that Darwinism is synonymous with atheism, or that evolution by natural selection is inherently anti-religious, is a form of pseudoscience too. I agree, but creationists insist on both.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MrHambre Member (Idle past 1423 days) Posts: 1495 From: Framingham, MA, USA Joined: |
I agree, but New Atheists insist on both
Fixed it for you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18351 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
It's not just science, it is economics, language, politics, health care, anything that in anyway conflicts with their beliefs. They believe we all are in a war. They don't trust human wisdom--alone---as the engine with which to move forward in scientific, cultural, and anthropological progress. They are afraid to see reality as evidenced. They can't handle observable truth, just as many scientific humanists cant handle religious dogma.God created war so that Americans would learn geography. —Mark Twain "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined:
|
Phat writes: They can't handle observable truth, just as many scientific humanists cant handle religious dogma. More nonsense. No one has a problem "handling" religious dogma, they just acknowledge that it is nothing but dogma.
Phat writes: Blame The Demons What demons? Is there, has there ever been, any evidence that a demon even exists?
Phat writes: They don't trust human wisdom--alone---as the engine with which to move forward in scientific, cultural, and anthropological progress. Yet not a single one has ever been able to provide any evidence that there is any resource other than "Human wisdom".Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8564 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.1
|
I think claiming that Darwinism is synonymous with atheism, or that evolution by natural selection is inherently anti-religious, is a form of pseudoscience too.
I agree, but creationists insist on both.I agree, but New Atheists insist on both. Fixed it for you. Since both agree to the same things then there is no problem. BTW, that's "Gnu". Gotta keep up with the culture.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rocky.C Member (Idle past 3038 days) Posts: 32 Joined:
|
These articles are nothing but filth!!
It doesn't surprise me that evolutionists resort to negative stereotyping of creationists. It is something that they have become very good at. It is more or less the only weapon they have in their arsenal. They certainly don't have science on their side. In any event, belief in Christ is a religion. So is believing in evolution. Both group must have faith. Anyone who says otherwise is not being honest. My great-great-great-great grandfather (his name was Common Sense) had faith, and he believed in creation. And based on the Holy Bible and that unwavering belief he made several startling predictions. He predicted that animals will produce after their own kind. He predicted that a canine will give birth only to a canine--never to a porcupine, monkey, or any other animal; that a feline will give birth to a feline; and, that a coelacanth will only come from another coelacanth. He wrote in his own words that a coelacanth will never morph into something other than what it is. Furthermore, he predicted that cockroaches will produce only cockroaches, and that crocodiles will produce only crocodiles. He said that his descendants could verify his predictions by a process called science. In this case, he called it "operational/observable science." My 4greatgrandfather, Mr. Common Sense, accepted, as fact, that all animals were created six thousand years ago, and that there was a worldwide flood that destroyed all air breathing birds and land animals. Mr. Common Sense was certain that the global flood, which covered the entire earth, would have quickly buried billions of organisms, and that this event would have left millions of fossils that would be discovered in time. He predicted that the flood would have sorted and deposited the plants and animals by buoyancy , density, habitat, and mobility. He firmly believed that trilobites, crabs, some fish and bottom dwelling animals would be found in the lower layers of sediment. My 4gg, Mr. Sense, wrote in his journal that amphibians, reptiles and some mammals would be found in the succeeding layers. He asserted that birds, humans, and the more intelligent and mobile animals would seek higher ground and become the last to perish. Not being covered quickly with sediment, he believed that they would leave few fossils. He (I believe more from prophecy that prediction) stated that more than 400 mammals would be found in the same rock strata as dinosaurs. Wow!!! Talking about insight. Based upon his understanding of the nature of humanity, as revealed within the pages of that wonderful Book, the Bible, he predicted that people would gradually come to accept a process called "evolution." And, that they would intentionally distort and misrepresent the fossils in order to achieve their goal. I don't know how he knew this, but that man had it going for him. I am sad to say that my 4gg was right when he predicted that dishonest men would subvert the fossils and the story that the fossils told. Common Sense (and, I don't know how he could have known this--but he did) wrote with all capital letters in his journal that unscrupulous men would devise a system of dating the fossils by the rocks they were found in. And by dating the rocks by the fossils that were found in them. He called it "circular reasoning" at its most extreme. It was, according to him, absurd, and against true science. He was furious that this trickery (or, I can't quite make it out. it could be quackery) went against (pardon the pun) common sense; reliability; integrity; but most of all science, especially "operational science." Common Sense wrote that the only point that everyone will be able to agree on is that all these fossils died. We do not know whether any of them had reproduced or not. And, he was absolutely right in saying that if any of them did, there is no reason to believe they were capable of doing what animals today can't do; and that is to produce offsprings that are not of their own kind. Wow, this is some exciting stuff, but I have promised to take my lovely wife to dinner. I know everyone is as excited as I am to see how much insight and foresight my g44, Common Sense, had. He was a remarkable man, but I must put his journal up for tonight. I will publish some more of his journal at a later date.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2136 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
I will publish some more of his journal at a later date. If it is of the same quality as the above, don't bother. It has all been dealt with before. Try a little research here: An Index to Creationist ClaimsReligious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge. Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1 "Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rocky.C Member (Idle past 3038 days) Posts: 32 Joined: |
Oh yeah, I forgot to add:
My 4gg said that one day discussion groups would be started about this very topic. He also said that people who know very little about creation would post meaningless links. It was his opinion that they would be incapable of typing their own words. He wrote in his journal that these unscrupulous people would be incapable (because the light of truth would scramble their brains) of putting anything in their own words (I think he said that it would be difficult for them to get pass, duh--Yes, that's it. He said they were stuck on the word "duh," whatever that means. I don't understand how he knew, but he said these lazy people would post links because they did not understand what they were posting themselves. People never answer these easy questions themselves. Because they can't. I hope nobody does that on here.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024