Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 81 (8905 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-19-2019 2:47 PM
33 online now:
AZPaul3, DrJones*, dwise1, edge, JoeT, JonF, PaulK, Tanypteryx, Taq, Theodoric, vimesey (11 members, 22 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 849,834 Year: 4,871/19,786 Month: 993/873 Week: 349/376 Day: 26/116 Hour: 3/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Facts vs. Truth
MexicanHotChocolate
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 9 (116277)
06-18-2004 2:21 AM


Part of the problem I see in the Evolution vs Creation debate is the confusion between Facts and Truth. Something can be True without necessarily being a Fact. Think of it this way--Newspapers deal in Facts--Who, What, When, Where, Why or How, whereas Novelists and poets deal in the meaning behind or beyond the facts. The same can be said about the difference between science and religion. Science can tell us the five Ws of life on Earth but is the province of philosophy and religion to give life on Earth meaning. On the other hand sacred texts like the Bible can give us the meaning behind life on Earth but give no real insight into how it came to be. "And god said..." just isn't a very good how.

This message has been edited by MexicanHotChocolate, 06-20-2004 01:51 AM


Our loyalties are to the species and the planet. We speak for Earth. Our obligation to survive is owed not just to ourselves but also to that Cosmos, ancient and vast, from which we spring.
--Carl Sagan, 1934-1996
Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by mike the wiz, posted 06-18-2004 2:01 PM MexicanHotChocolate has not yet responded
 Message 5 by pink sasquatch, posted 06-18-2004 2:31 PM MexicanHotChocolate has responded

  
AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 2 of 9 (116324)
06-18-2004 5:03 AM


Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.
  
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4656
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 3 of 9 (116483)
06-18-2004 2:01 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by MexicanHotChocolate
06-18-2004 2:21 AM


I suppose the bible isn't a science book. So yes, it deals with the "why". But if we are creationist, and keep it to ourselves, would that be okay? How do our beliefs about what happened in the past, effect the truth of what happened anyway? It's just an alternative to believing evolution.

Science makes it so that things like the bible cannot be involved. I think I understand why. It deals with the "how", and if it included what it sees as "religious texts", then what's to stop every text being included?

So, the debate is because creationists still think creationism is what actually happened. If it is what happened, then you can see why they have "tried" to spread it. It's a bit like belief. You might say you have no reason to believe, but what if it is the truth anyway? I guess science is a useless way to convince people of God, in a way anyway.

It's like the mechanics on a motorcycle, either you are interested in how it works, or you are interested in why it works. I suppose there are two groups, the "hows" and the "whys". I would want to ride the bike, whereas someone else might want to know how it works. Telling them, "It works because I like riding it" might be useless to that person.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by MexicanHotChocolate, posted 06-18-2004 2:21 AM MexicanHotChocolate has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by pink sasquatch, posted 06-18-2004 2:18 PM mike the wiz has responded

  
pink sasquatch
Member (Idle past 4127 days)
Posts: 1567
Joined: 06-10-2004


Message 4 of 9 (116495)
06-18-2004 2:18 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by mike the wiz
06-18-2004 2:01 PM


I would want to ride the bike, whereas someone else might want to know how it works. Telling them, "It works because I like riding it" might be useless to that person.

I agree with your analogy - but to take it a bit of step further:

There are also a small subset of people who like the why of the bike (riding it), don't know how it works, but stubbornly try to argue the physics of internal combustion having only read the motorcycle's owner's manual.

This can be most frustrating to both the "just riders" and the physicists.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by mike the wiz, posted 06-18-2004 2:01 PM mike the wiz has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by MrHambre, posted 06-18-2004 2:45 PM pink sasquatch has not yet responded
 Message 7 by mike the wiz, posted 06-18-2004 3:26 PM pink sasquatch has responded

  
pink sasquatch
Member (Idle past 4127 days)
Posts: 1567
Joined: 06-10-2004


Message 5 of 9 (116499)
06-18-2004 2:31 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by MexicanHotChocolate
06-18-2004 2:21 AM


Something can be a True without necessarily being a Fact.

It can? Perhaps I've confused by the wordplay. What is "a True"?

If the truth is known, then it is a fact, no?

Is Truth simply what is, but is unknown? In that case is Truth unknown Fact?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by MexicanHotChocolate, posted 06-18-2004 2:21 AM MexicanHotChocolate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by MexicanHotChocolate, posted 06-20-2004 2:51 AM pink sasquatch has not yet responded

  
MrHambre
Member (Idle past 217 days)
Posts: 1494
From: Framingham, MA, USA
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 6 of 9 (116511)
06-18-2004 2:45 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by pink sasquatch
06-18-2004 2:18 PM


Physics Is Atheism
Pink sasquatch notes:
quote:
There are also a small subset of people who like the why of the bike (riding it), don't know how it works, but stubbornly try to argue the physics of internal combustion having only read the motorcycle's owner's manual.
Now that's creationism in a nutshell. Well done.

regards,
Esteban Hambre


This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by pink sasquatch, posted 06-18-2004 2:18 PM pink sasquatch has not yet responded

    
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4656
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 7 of 9 (116527)
06-18-2004 3:26 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by pink sasquatch
06-18-2004 2:18 PM


I agree partially. Yet I know creationists who do there homework aswell.

Though, yes. There are lots of creationists who are guilty of this. Others admitt their inner-layman before debate commences. Lots have admitted that they are no experts. I'm pretty sure that not every evolutionist here is an expert on the how either.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by pink sasquatch, posted 06-18-2004 2:18 PM pink sasquatch has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by pink sasquatch, posted 06-18-2004 4:51 PM mike the wiz has not yet responded

  
pink sasquatch
Member (Idle past 4127 days)
Posts: 1567
Joined: 06-10-2004


Message 8 of 9 (116543)
06-18-2004 4:51 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by mike the wiz
06-18-2004 3:26 PM


I agree that their are creationists that have done their homework - that's why I used "small subset" in my analogy.

And I agree that most on both sides of the argument are not 'experts'.

Certain (by no means all) creationists are specifically frustrating when the Bible is the only source they acknowledge, to the point that they don't know the basic ideas of the theories they claim to support and disprove. Discussion is rendered pointless.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by mike the wiz, posted 06-18-2004 3:26 PM mike the wiz has not yet responded

  
MexicanHotChocolate
Inactive Member


Message 9 of 9 (116821)
06-20-2004 2:51 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by pink sasquatch
06-18-2004 2:31 PM


Fact and Truth
Facts are concrete objective concepts like: dogs have four legs, the sky is blue, grass is green, chlorine gas is toxic to humans...these sorts of things can be proven through observation and testing.

Truths are more general, abstract, broad ideas like Good and Evil, Right and Wrong, Peace, Freedom, Justice and Injustice...

Or a truth can be a subjective insight into human nature. Those kinds of insights are the basis of art, theater, fiction, and mythology...Truths are things that can not be proven scientifically they must be demonstrated metaphorically...


This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by pink sasquatch, posted 06-18-2004 2:31 PM pink sasquatch has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019