FunctionalAtheist
Hammer of Reason
Might as well have a forum called use your brain vs believe what you are told! Opinions?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Evolution V Creationism?
- Thread starter FunctionalAtheist
- Start date
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber
On that note, how many people who accept evolution have actually pondered it and considered the evidence themselves?
FunctionalAtheist
Hammer of Reason
I have!
Not really thought about it that much. Evolution is something that is repeated everywhere and anyone who disagrees is ridiculed. There's not a huge incentive to question the science even to better understand it.
FunctionalAtheist
Hammer of Reason
Sort of like gravity? Repeated everywhere, ridiculed for disagreeing, and nothing more than theory!
It's more complicated than that. There is also the position of blending the two.
FunctionalAtheist
Hammer of Reason
Only if you 'partially' believe what you are told?
No. It is the position that makes the most sense to some people when all the evidence and argumentation is considered.
FunctionalAtheist
Hammer of Reason
When all the evidence and argumentation is considered.........that would imply using your brain!
FunctionalAtheist
Hammer of Reason
I love this replyj.
"not thought about it... if i disagree...am ridiculed...."
Got a love it!
Yeah. Exactly. if you stand up and say "why does gravity attract objects rather than repel them?" you'll get laughed down (even though its actually a decent question). If Science is treated as a way of thinking rather than a set of fixed conclusions these questions should be welcomed. Creationism rests on a different set of philosophical assumptions from "Science" but those doesn't mean creationists can or should be written off as "stupid". there are legitimate issues with creationism about what is science and why something is considered knowledge.
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
The natural desire to learn and understand should be enough incentive.
FunctionalAtheist
Hammer of Reason
Actually it's not a decent question. First comes attraction, then comes the theory. There is no 'here is gravity why doesn't it repel?' And no, there are no legitimate issues, among educated individuals (educated in science, biology, and evolution i.e.) with creationism.
we're social animals and the desire not to be ridiculed is at least as "natural" even if it is an impediment to knowledge and progress. We might celebrate dissent doesn't mean we want to be the ones who have to make the sacrifices of expressing such views. It is more likely that subversives are despised within their own lifetime and idolised when they are dead because they have ceased to pose a threat to the status quo. who wants to spend the rest of lives under house arrest like Galileo, or be subject to continuous harassment as a "crank"?
And I'm guessing "educated individuals" does not include philosophers, historians of science or theologians because the only "approved" measure of education and intellect is submission and conformity to "science"?
Yes. And in using your brain one might come to a position that blends creationism with evolution.
Last edited:
Curious George
Veteran Member
I don't ridicule. All others don't ridicule. Some do. However some ridicule if you question creationism as well.
I think the best response to questioning is research and information. So if you questioned, evolution or gravity, or even creationism it is best that we pursue your line of questioning. However, if you were to pronunce evolution as false to me, I would likely challenge you.
Is that ridicule?
No. If something is true it should be objectively true, based on observation (and repeatable in terms of experiments as a natural pheneoma). Evolution has "domestic selection" of poultry, pigeons, dogs as a way to show that the process of selection does exist. Darwin went one step further and said competition over resources as the mechanism for selection in nature. But if you are dealing with new or radical scientific ideas, it will be as difficult to get scientists to change their minds given that knowledge is still ultimately discovered by humans and our ability to share ideas follows laws of social behaviour. Scientists close ranks against dissenting views as much as anyone else, but perhaps they are mentally better trained and disciplined to respond to evidence than we are as the general public.
The habit of accusing people of being "stupid", "crazy", "idiots", "deluded", etc in order to end the discussion would be ridicule. The purpose of ridicule is to derail and prevent the discussion taking place because others opinions are not considered "worthy" of consideration. It does depend on which group of people you are around for which ideas are too taboo to question, but certainly creationism vs. evolution is one area that is particular sensitive given its the intersection between science and religion. its that willingness to try to shut down a debate by treating a view as "too stupid to consider" that is a real problem. there is a point if you want to say we have to be efficient about the way we use our time and people have to move on rather than have the same discussion forever but that's a rational argument and a basis for agreement rather than ridicule.
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
If you thinking of theistic evolution, I wouldn't consider that a "blending". When I think creationism, I think of things instantaneously "poofing" into existence in their first and final form.
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
In the modern world, logic and evidence tend to separate the valid views from the bunk ones.
Of course, assertions that can be substantiated will hold more weight then assertions that cannot. You can't just pull something out of your *** and expect it to be regarded with the same respect as something that has gone through rigorous analysis and testing.
Last edited: