Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Double Standard
RC Priest
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 2 (248347)
10-02-2005 8:43 PM


Creationism is a theistic model, but since evolution purports to explain origins and development naturally (as opposed to supernaturally) is this not the opposite of a theistic model? Richard Dawkins in writings that “Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist,” is making a philosophical statement. His science is not judged by the atheistic presuppositions that he approaches Science with, but YEC’s and ID theorists, who have theistic presuppositions, have their science (however bad it might be) criticized as religion. This seems to be a double standard? Darwin himself spoke of creation, and the Creator who ”breathed into a few forms or into one,’ yet despite this rather spiritual language, his science is separated from that. Why are those who deny that naturalism is synonymous with science not shown the same courtesy?
Evc's Resident Priest

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


Message 2 of 2 (248354)
10-02-2005 8:52 PM


Thread copied to the Double Standard thread in the Is It Science? forum, this copy of the thread has been closed.

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024