It seems to me that creationists do not understand what the Theory of Evolution actually says. I'm sure I'm not the only evolutionist who thinks this. We, as evolutionists, are constantly fighting strawmen on this forum. It seems, in fact, that creationists are not even making
any effort to understand at all.
I realize that some of what evolution proposes is not really intuitive on the scale humans are used to thinking on, but it doesn't seem like an astronomical feat to me to realize that, for example,
Mendelian genetics and descent with modification are compatible ideas.
I formalized this as a statement while thinking through a response to AndrewPD on his new intermediates thread. The statement (which did not make the final cut) went like this:
quote:
Why is it that nobody who believes evolution ever thinks about it enough to figure out what it actually says?
Indeed, it seems that, only if a theory is "one's own" will one actually develop enough understanding of it to actually make authoritative arguments about it.
I remember my "conversion" to evolution a few years back. I had decided to accept it long before I really had a deep understanding of how it worked, and have only since then developed a solid grasp of the concepts involved.
Furthermore, the further I get involved in science, ToE and this debate, the less patience I find myself having for reading ID/creation materials, for even considering their arguments, etc.
This makes me wonder, on more general terms, how and why we filter information about our worldviews and theories, and what impacts this might have on what we accept or reject.
Some questions to ask:
Does belief always come before understanding? Should it?
How large is the role of confirmation bias in our learning process?
Are we doing the same thing to Intelligent Design that they obviously are to the Theory of Evolution?
Are any of us really beating up anything other than strawmen?
What does this mean for science education? Surely our professors (are ourselves, for those who
are professors) have their "own theories": won't this color their lectures?
Expect me to play devil's advocate, because I don't think anybody else will be willing to do so, and this will be a boring discussion of nobody does.
Maybe "Is it Science?" is a good place for this?
Edited by Admin, : No reason given.
-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)
Darwin loves you.