Evointrinsic
Member
This has been coming about more and more it seems. I see in a lot of posts that people are stating that Evolution is a Belief or even that it is a faith. Could someone explain this to me?
Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
-
Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
[_ Old Earth _] Why is evolution (to some people) considered a belief?
- Thread starter Evointrinsic
- Start date
Evointrinsic
Member
Barb has already stated that he doesn't accept evolution as a belief or an ideology, he accepts evolution based on the evidence of it.
Feel free, however, to explain how it an Ideology.
Feel free, however, to explain how it an Ideology.
Pard
Member
Evointrinsic said:
I believe Wiki has a more detailed definition of the word, however and I'd like to share that as well:
That is a giant paragraph, so it needs to be broken down into bit sized pieces...
Nothing to say here. That is plainly obvious...
I'd suggest the latter of the options, that is "a set of ideas proposed by the dominant class of a society to all members of this society." Now why would I say this? Easy. In every public school in America children are taught a single theory that answers the question "How did we get here?". What is that sole answer? Is it creation? No. Is it evolution? Yes, yes it is. So right there we see it is a set of ideas that one class (and evidently the "dominant" one, since we live in a republican country). Furthermore, anyone who even breathes creation near a public school gets a slap on the wrist and a court date from the ACLU. This is not only in the public school systems, however. Many (the VAST majority) of colleges only endorse a evolutionary stand-point and teachers have been fired (in some colleges) for even mentioning that creation is an alternative view to evolution.
Has the advent of the theory of evolution made a change in society? Yes it has, this is evident. Is it relatively uniform in its doctrine? Yes it is. How? Because it is discussed in the same way in essentially every high school and middle school text book. This will ensure that by the end of the previous generation the majority of adults will hold evolution as the answer to the question posed above, and furthermore it will be more or less a uniform answer, unless of course the adult did further research into and has drawn a different conclusion, or they are of a religious faith that professes a different answer to this question posed above.
[/quote:3ulj2h93]
Politics? This is science we are talking about! Yes, it is science, but politics permeate every level of our lives. There have been politicians (usually in primaries) that have won on the sole issue of evolution. Evolution is a primary factor in many school text book debates and it soaks up millions of dollars each year. There are political groups around this country that are for evolution and only evolution. I have seen these people and these rallies, and it reminds me of any liberal political rally.
So yes, I would have to say that evolution is an ideology.
One could go so far as to say a faith of the religious kind (since there are many forms of faith that do not touch on religion at all; i.e. faith in the US Postal Service...). I would not be able to help make that argument, as I have no idea why someone would want to stand their faith on such shaky and unfounded grounds. However, perhaps due to that fact that many professing atheists turn to evolution it has become a faith for those who have little faith in anything else.
Barbarian
Member
Evo writes:
Barb has already stated that he doesn't accept evolution as a belief or an ideology, he accepts evolution based on the evidence of it.]/quote]
Probably because evidence doesn't mean much to you. But that's the basis on which scientists accept or reject theories. It is wrong to "believe in" science. One should accept it so long as the evidence supports it.
That would rule out evolutionary theory or any other scientific theory as an ideology. Scientists would be the first to tell you that one should not try to base one's values or principles on science.
Also not part of any scientific theory.
An ideology is a set of ideas that discusses one's goals, expectations, and actions.
Very true. Science is never normative, in the sense you want it to be. And again, scientists emphasize that nature is not a guide for human conduct in any way.
No. That's never part of the curriculum, because that is a religious notion. How humans evolved is sometimes taught, but that's not the same thing. You aren't your body. As C.S. Lewis points out, you are a soul, who has a body.
Or, as most Americans know, it's both. As you know, no public school in America denies creation. Science rules out YE creationism, but then so does the Bible.
I have taught in public schools. I have openly prayed there, and even acknowledged that I believe in God before a class. (while at the same time telling the class I have no right to do anything more than that so long as I stood before them as a teacher) My daughter and friends did "at the flagpole" prayers before school and no one could stop them. When I taught a unit on bioethics, students prepared and displayed posters declaring what God wants of us, and no one told me they had to take them down.
You've been considerably misled on this. (I did clear it with the principal, who said the school board would back me up if someone complained)
They only teach chemistry; no phlogiston any more. And the physics department refuses to even consider that lightning might be God attacking His enemies. How closed-minded of them. ;)
A great drop in homicide rates over the last 150 years, for example. Slavery abolished. Women given equal rights. And of course a great many medical and agricultural advances.
I get to review science textbooks. And it's very clear from that statement that you do not.
Lenin once said that everything was about Marxism. To an ideologue, apparently everything is about ideology. Here's a way to test your belief; ask a scientist why he accepts evolution. If he says "because Darwin said so", it's ideology. If he starts talking about evidence, it's science.
:o
The real damage is this:
But eventually, by 1994 I was through with young-earth creationISM. Nothing that young-earth creationists had taught me about geology turned out to be true. I took a poll of my ICR graduate friends who have worked in the oil industry. I asked them one question.
"From your oil industry experience, did any fact that you were taught at ICR, which challenged current geological thinking, turn out in the long run to be true? ,"
That is a very simple question. One man, Steve Robertson, who worked for Shell grew real silent on the phone, sighed and softly said 'No!' A very close friend that I had hired at Arco, after hearing the question, exclaimed, "Wait a minute. There has to be one!" But he could not name one. I can not name one. No one else could either. One man I could not reach, to ask that question, had a crisis of faith about two years after coming into the oil industry. I do not know what his spiritual state is now but he was in bad shape the last time I talked to him.
And being through with creationism, I very nearly became through with Christianity.
http://home.entouch.net/dmd/gstory.htm
YE is a highly efficient atheist-maker.
Barb has already stated that he doesn't accept evolution as a belief or an ideology, he accepts evolution based on the evidence of it.]/quote]
Probably because evidence doesn't mean much to you. But that's the basis on which scientists accept or reject theories. It is wrong to "believe in" science. One should accept it so long as the evidence supports it.
That would rule out evolutionary theory or any other scientific theory as an ideology. Scientists would be the first to tell you that one should not try to base one's values or principles on science.
Also not part of any scientific theory.
An ideology is a set of ideas that discusses one's goals, expectations, and actions.
Very true. Science is never normative, in the sense you want it to be. And again, scientists emphasize that nature is not a guide for human conduct in any way.
No. That's never part of the curriculum, because that is a religious notion. How humans evolved is sometimes taught, but that's not the same thing. You aren't your body. As C.S. Lewis points out, you are a soul, who has a body.
Or, as most Americans know, it's both. As you know, no public school in America denies creation. Science rules out YE creationism, but then so does the Bible.
I have taught in public schools. I have openly prayed there, and even acknowledged that I believe in God before a class. (while at the same time telling the class I have no right to do anything more than that so long as I stood before them as a teacher) My daughter and friends did "at the flagpole" prayers before school and no one could stop them. When I taught a unit on bioethics, students prepared and displayed posters declaring what God wants of us, and no one told me they had to take them down.
You've been considerably misled on this. (I did clear it with the principal, who said the school board would back me up if someone complained)
They only teach chemistry; no phlogiston any more. And the physics department refuses to even consider that lightning might be God attacking His enemies. How closed-minded of them. ;)
A great drop in homicide rates over the last 150 years, for example. Slavery abolished. Women given equal rights. And of course a great many medical and agricultural advances.
I get to review science textbooks. And it's very clear from that statement that you do not.
Lenin once said that everything was about Marxism. To an ideologue, apparently everything is about ideology. Here's a way to test your belief; ask a scientist why he accepts evolution. If he says "because Darwin said so", it's ideology. If he starts talking about evidence, it's science.
:o
The real damage is this:
But eventually, by 1994 I was through with young-earth creationISM. Nothing that young-earth creationists had taught me about geology turned out to be true. I took a poll of my ICR graduate friends who have worked in the oil industry. I asked them one question.
"From your oil industry experience, did any fact that you were taught at ICR, which challenged current geological thinking, turn out in the long run to be true? ,"
That is a very simple question. One man, Steve Robertson, who worked for Shell grew real silent on the phone, sighed and softly said 'No!' A very close friend that I had hired at Arco, after hearing the question, exclaimed, "Wait a minute. There has to be one!" But he could not name one. I can not name one. No one else could either. One man I could not reach, to ask that question, had a crisis of faith about two years after coming into the oil industry. I do not know what his spiritual state is now but he was in bad shape the last time I talked to him.
And being through with creationism, I very nearly became through with Christianity.
http://home.entouch.net/dmd/gstory.htm
YE is a highly efficient atheist-maker.
Evointrinsic
Member
Pard said:
I do not see how this relates to Evolution, as Evolution is a phenomenon that occurs through mutation and successive generation. It doesn't explain human life or culture. It isn't a view. and it isn't a sociopolitical program. Would Atoms be considered Ideology as well? <-- (rhetorical)
I believe Wiki has a more detailed definition of the word, however and I'd like to share that as well:
Pard said:
If you think that Evolution discusses any goals of anything or expectations of anything or even actions of anything, than I have no idea what you think Evolution is.
Pard said:
But it wasn't proposed by schools or by anyone for that matter. The theory of evolution was proposed by a single man, but evolution wasn't. You seem to forget that a scientific theory is an attempt to explain a natural phenomenon. Gravity wasn't "proposed", Atoms weren't "proposed", Germs weren't "proposed". They all have theories to explain them, but they are all naturally occurring elements/objects. So my question is not of "what makes the theory of evolution an ideology" I asked "what makes evolution an ideology".
Even if we are looking at any of these theories, the fact that they are generally accepted doesn't make them an Ideology if they all don't base their information on cultural aspects.
Pard said:
Once again, I asked why is Evolution an ideology, not the Theory of Evolution. Nevertheless I will address your claims.
Yes, evolution has changed society, but it isn't offering any kind of cultural change such as a religion. It's not a set of rules or anything like that, it's merely an explanation of something that already exists.
Doctrine? I could hardly see how a natural phenomenon is a doctrine.
Pard said:
Politics? This is science we are talking about! Yes, it is science, but politics permeate every level of our lives. There have been politicians (usually in primaries) that have won on the sole issue of evolution. Evolution is a primary factor in many school text book debates and it soaks up millions of dollars each year. There are political groups around this country that are for evolution and only evolution. I have seen these people and these rallies, and it reminds me of any liberal political rally. [/quote]
The issue with this is that it isn't an "explicit system of thought", It's fact.
Pard said:
The faith of the US postal service is much different from religious faith. I may have faith in a person to do something, but that is in no way similar to religious faith. One is confidence or trust, the other is a belief that is not based on proof.
The same goes with scientific theory. Science is only regulated based on evidence, there for it makes no sense to relate a scientific theory with religious faith.
Pard
Member
Oh Barb, so naive.
Has anyone (meaning me) stated that all evolutionists are ideologues? No, not at all...
In fact I have never even mentioned scientists as ideologues. The ideologues are the people who are brainwashed into believing evolution is the only way. It is on TV, newspapers, magazines, schools, books, you name it, its there, and in your face (much like liberalism). I never once mentioned true scientists because if they are true scientists they rely on facts alone (although I could make the point that believing on evolution means setting facts aside, but that isn't what this so about and so I won't).
Evolution is a ideology to the masses who see it and hear it everywhere. Your beloved public school systems have even taught me it was an ideology. Sociology, the study of society, taught me that evolution is an ideology to the people who never learn anything more about it than what is taught in school.
Evidence means everything to me, that's why I cannot accept the theory of evolution.
Evo, what are you talking about? Well, I know what you are talking about, but I would prefer if you didn't rip off my exact example to make the exact same statement I made, which is that many things can mean faith and I had to state that I was referring to religious faith since there are other types and I went on to give an example of a NON religious type of faith. I do not know how I can make it any clearer for you...
Has anyone (meaning me) stated that all evolutionists are ideologues? No, not at all...
In fact I have never even mentioned scientists as ideologues. The ideologues are the people who are brainwashed into believing evolution is the only way. It is on TV, newspapers, magazines, schools, books, you name it, its there, and in your face (much like liberalism). I never once mentioned true scientists because if they are true scientists they rely on facts alone (although I could make the point that believing on evolution means setting facts aside, but that isn't what this so about and so I won't).
Evolution is a ideology to the masses who see it and hear it everywhere. Your beloved public school systems have even taught me it was an ideology. Sociology, the study of society, taught me that evolution is an ideology to the people who never learn anything more about it than what is taught in school.
Evidence means everything to me, that's why I cannot accept the theory of evolution.
Evo, what are you talking about? Well, I know what you are talking about, but I would prefer if you didn't rip off my exact example to make the exact same statement I made, which is that many things can mean faith and I had to state that I was referring to religious faith since there are other types and I went on to give an example of a NON religious type of faith. I do not know how I can make it any clearer for you...
Evointrinsic
Member
Pard said:
woops! i misread that, hahaha. My following sentences still stand, however
Pard
Member
My answer to your last words would be the same as to Barb. I am well aware that real scientists will not put faith of the religious kind into their studies, however the normal person does take it to heart as true faith. Science needs to learn that, people trust them and they do take this to heart and many take it on as though it was a religious faith.
logical bob
Member
It's the label "evolutionist" that gets me.
You don't call anyone a gravitationist, electromagnetismist, thermodynamicist, inorganic chemistryist or quantum chromodynamicist, so what gives?
You don't call anyone a gravitationist, electromagnetismist, thermodynamicist, inorganic chemistryist or quantum chromodynamicist, so what gives?
Evointrinsic
Member
Pard said:
I still have to argue this point however. As Barbarian and I have stated before, You can accept the evidence or you can reject it. You don't simply believe in science (whatever the theory or law or so forth is). There are only two options, acceptation or rejection. could you give us an example of how a "normal person" takes it to heart as true faith. Also, are you referring to people accepting science faithfully (that whatever thing they accept is true) or that people believe science is based on faith? just to clarify.
To Logical Bob: It's because they believe that there is no evidence what so ever to evolution, which makes them claim it's a belief system. unfortunately.
Pard
Member
logical bob said:
You call me a creationist... Don't deny it, I have seen all you of use the word at one point or another. That and... do you see anyone putting up an alternative view to gravity? magnets? thermodynamics?
Actually... an inorganic chemIST... maybe a fluke, just pointing that out ;)
quantum chromodynamicist, I'd make a joke about the chrome on my car, but I won't.
Well, what I mean is people who are taught evolution is the answer (and it is taught that way, I have endured it... and despite what barb may claim, I was never given any alternatives to evolution. Actually, I was a card caring member of the evolution club, and my doubts toward evolution drove me to faith in the Lord, not the other way around). When someone is given only one answer they can accept it or deny it, you are right. However, because public schools are not college science courses, the little they teach you about evolution leaves you with enough to claim it is true and not enough to actually know anything about it (if that makes sense). I have seen it happen before.
It happens in children, and my point was that by the time the baby boomers die out the next generation (mine generation, just about) will have grown up learning evolution in high school and it is very much a possibility that they will still treat it the way I see them treat it in school. (Sorry, its hard to explain, maybe you should sit in on biology in HS sometime? lol)
I mean accepting it to the point that they are blinded by any other possible reasoning.
Pard
Member
jasoncran said:
Social darwinism is a terrible thing and I would hesitate to think anyone here agrees to such atrocities at any level. I'd suggest a topic elsewhere for this discussion because it was created by a Marxist after Darwin was dead. I have heard people call it "hijacking" Darwin's theory, then again, I have heard that Darwin subscribed to it and that it was around before Darwin's death... Good point, I would just say the wrong topic!
Pard
Member
jasoncran said:
No, you are right. I just don't want to clutter up this topic with that, because Barbarian will most def. have one view and I the polar opposite, and everyone else will want a bite and then there goes Evo's topic! Why dont you go ahead and make a topic some where and I will start ranting about it.
Evointrinsic
Member
Pard said:
Here's a quote from a very intelligent person and his video series:
AronRa said:
That's the long way of explaining it. Unfortunately it is incorrect.
An "Ism" is a suffix that forms abstract nouns of action, state, condition, doctrine. Because the Theory of evolution is not an action, state, condition or a doctrine, "Ism" cannot be an additive to the original word. Evolutionism cannot exist, where as Creationism can.
Pard said:
Not all teachers say that evolution is the only possibility. In fact, none should be saying that, it isn't! There is nothing in science that is unable to be questioned.
Pard said:
Is it at all a possibility that you misinterpreted something? Could you ask your teacher this question (assuming your still in school... right?)? Just ask "Can evolution be falsified?" If the answer is yes, than your teacher is most likely not being devious, which is good.
Jason: out of curiosity, have you read Darwin's book "On The Origin of Species" first?
jasoncran
Member
no, but that was odd to see that social darwinism was mentioned.real odd,and it appeared they were talking about it being still in use. when i saw that this thread was dealing with evolution as a belief. i though i mentioned how some have formed world views based on evolution and that was one of those ideas.