Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9077 total)
93 online now:
AnswersInGenitals, Astrophile, dwise1, nwr, Tanypteryx (5 members, 88 visitors)
Newest Member: Contrarian
Post Volume: Total: 894,045 Year: 5,157/6,534 Month: 577/794 Week: 68/135 Day: 8/6 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The opponent of Creationism is Naturalism not Evolution
Tangle
Member
Posts: 8549
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.4


(2)
Message 4 of 30 (875644)
05-02-2020 2:57 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Richard L. Wang
05-01-2020 4:46 PM


R.L.Wang writes:

... evolution essentially belongs to Atheistic view, so a Creationist must reject evolution. This is not true.

Yeh, us atheists know this. You need to tell the creationists; they're constantly telling us that evolution=atheism.

Of course, Neo-Darwinism’s interpretation of evolution is an Atheistic theory.

It's nothing of the sort, it's simply science explaining reality by adding genetics to Darwin's original work. (Darwin knew nothing about genes and DNA of course.)

… evolution can be explained from a Theistic point of view, so evolution is NOT the opponent of Creationism.

Whether evolution can rub along with religion depends on precisely what the believer believes. The problem Christian religions originally had with it was that until Darwin came along they all believed that species were immutable. They believed in special creation. The sensible, self-preservingly minded Christian sects modified this view - eventually - but some refused so you have the current divide. But it's a declining number.

In this war, if the Creationists don’t even know who the opponent is, how can Creationists win the battle?

The creationist's enemy is actually knowledge and education.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"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.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Richard L. Wang, posted 05-01-2020 4:46 PM Richard L. Wang has taken no action

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 8549
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 13 of 30 (875709)
05-03-2020 5:28 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Richard L. Wang
05-03-2020 4:36 PM


Re: Science reveals the creation of God
RLW writes:

The description of naturalism - given by the Oxford English Dictionary Online that naturalism is the "idea or belief that only natural (as opposed to supernatural or spiritual) laws and forces operate in the world." - is in philosophy. In fact, this is a scientific statement, so I take it as the description of naturalism in science as well.

Round these parts we don't much care for philosophy, deep thought is only a very, very poor substitute for actual facts and information that can be tested and verified.

As I pointed out, the opponent of Creationism is Naturalism rather than Evolution ... Creationism can refute Naturalism. Contrary to most people’s view, science is on the side of Creationism not Naturalism. Science reveals the creation of God.

So now we get it.

I’m going to propose a series of topics. The answer for each topic is YES or NO. If YES, I won the debate on that topic; if NO, I lost,

And what we get is yet another loony that claims to be a scientist and knows the “truth”. But oddly, instead of publishing his “truth” in Nature, he comes to a dead and dying website to attempt to convince a handful of aging atheists of his revealed “truth”. I can hardly wait.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"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.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Richard L. Wang, posted 05-03-2020 4:36 PM Richard L. Wang has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by RAZD, posted 05-04-2020 8:49 AM Tangle has taken no action

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 8549
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.4


(2)
Message 16 of 30 (875722)
05-04-2020 3:40 AM


re naturalism. This is TalkOrigins' answer

quote:
Response:

The naturalism that science adopts is methodological naturalism. It does not assume that nature is all there is; it merely notes that nature is the only objective standard we have. The supernatural is not ruled out a priori; when it claims observable results that can be studied scientifically, the supernatural is studied scientifically (e.g., Astin et al. 2000; Enright 1999). It gets little attention because it has never been reliably observed. Still, there are many scientists who use naturalism but who believe in more than nature.

The very same form of naturalism is used by everyone, including creationists, in their day-to-day lives. People literally could not survive without making naturalistic assumptions. Creationism itself is based on the naturalistic assumption that the Bible has not changed since the last time it was read.

Naturalism works. By assuming methodological naturalism, we have made tremendous advances in industry, medicine, agriculture, and many other fields. Supernaturalism has never led anywhere. Newton, for example, wrote far more on theology than he did on physics, but his theological work is largely forgotten because there has been no reason to remember it other than for historical curiosity.

Supernaturalism is contentious. Scientific findings are based on hard evidence, and scientists can point at the evidence to resolve disputes. People tend to have different and incompatible ideas of what form supernatural influences take, and all too often the only effective way they have found for reaching a consensus is by killing each other.


CA301: Science and naturalism


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"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.


  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 8549
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 21 of 30 (875736)
05-04-2020 4:36 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by Richard L. Wang
05-04-2020 3:54 PM


Re: This topic – EvC or NvC – is over
RLW writes:

It seems that almost all posts of this topic agree that the opponent of Creationism is Naturalism not Evolution, so this topic can be ended.

Is this the way it's going to be? You declare what we have agreed while ignoring what we've said?

If so, it won't go well for you here.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"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.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Richard L. Wang, posted 05-04-2020 3:54 PM Richard L. Wang has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by Richard L. Wang, posted 05-04-2020 4:51 PM Tangle has taken no action

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 8549
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.4


(1)
Message 28 of 30 (875768)
05-05-2020 2:17 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by Richard L. Wang
05-05-2020 12:49 PM


Re: Please keep discussion civil
RLW writes:

In short, this debate will discuss whether the existence of God needs to be considered in the interpretation of the world.

It's either going to be a very short debate - science can consider anything that impinges on reality, including god(s) if they'd like to do a bit of impinging - or a very long one - if we spend forever quibbling about definitions.

Even so, you DO need be more careful with your terminology. So far you've been muddled, inexact and unspecific - naturalism has several meanings, you need to be specific. Neo-Darwinism is not atheism - it's biology. Science is not only done by atheists, not even mostly, and most atheists are not scientists (because most people are not scientists).

It's probably best if you put your cards on the table and tell us what you actually believe and want to say rather than mess about like this.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"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.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Richard L. Wang, posted 05-05-2020 12:49 PM Richard L. Wang has taken no action

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022