The Truth About Evolution and Religion

Care to give the definition then?

And your evidence for all these blind assertions is what exactly?

Then why would we even consider it? I'd say of all knowledge really. For if you "know" something that cannot be demonstrated to be true, what good is that knowledge? Actually there is. No, that is called memory.

Then why bring up souls and metaphysics? That has nothing to do with evolution. No you don't. Biology studies the natural world. If the soul is not part of that, then biology does not study it. Metaphysics has nothing to do with it. They don;t understand bbiology because they can't answer a question about something that has absolutely nothing to do with biology? What a weird position to take. Do plumbers not know anything about pipes because they can't answer questions about brain surgery? If tehy do talk about those things, then they talk about them on a personal note, and not as biologists (well, apart perhaps from materialism). Since none of those hhave anything to do with biology.

Probably 3. As a teacher I'd never tell them number 2 (which is my position, but as a teacher you can't say that to your students). Number 4 is nonsensical and number 1 is not helping them very much. The one to ask about free will is the philosophy teacher, since he is the one that specializes in those kind of things.

I'd say with just the past. I'd love to know if you have a method for remembering the future. Nonsense. They exist regardless of a "real being" (Whatever that is) thinking about them. For example, if nobody thinks about WWII, it will suddenly not have happened? Mental beings are something you made up.

I said I'd choose 3. My personal choice would be 2. 4 I wouldn't even consider, since that is not an answer to the question. I t makes no sense as an answer to the question. Of course. I am a teacher (in your example). Would they ask me for my personal oppinion, I would give it to them. But as their teacher it is not my place to tell them what they shoudl think. This is not talking from both sides of my mouth, this is taking my job seriously. As do I. But in your example I am a teacher, and so I have a certain professionalism I have to take into account. If you would teach only your personal oppinions to students, you would be a lousy teacher. Evidence? That's called taking responsibility, not free will. Free will doesn't exist., free choice on the other hand, does.

Now that I think about it a bit more, you're probably right. Anyway, it's not really relevant to this thread anyway, which should be about evolution and religion, rather than about if free will exists or not.

It doesn't. Were they there as teachers, or were they there as a panel that discussed their opinions? If the former, shame on them. But I suspect it was the latter, in which case, what the hell are you whining about, if that's their opinion and they're there to discuss it, what could possibly be wrong about giving that opinion? He probably thought you meant the entire ToE.

I've been reading through this thread a little, and you continue to use the term "natural selection" or "the theory of natural selection". You use these terms in a way that seems a bit wrong to me. Would you mind telling me what you think "natural selection" means, or what the "theory of natural selection" says?Please, just the definition of those terms, nothing else is required.

First you leave random mutations out of evolution by solely talking about natural selection, now you leave out natural selection by talking solely about random mutations.Why do you do such weird things?

No it doesn't. Evolution includes random mutations. If you say things like the quote above, I think you're explaining it wrong.

Great minds think alike, eh? But they have cooties!

Of course not. Evolution explains that.

No. He is saying EVOLUTION explains the complexity of life. How many times do we have to tell you this? Yes. So?