Friday, June 19, 2009
I just wanted to clarify something I was unable to do so in class yesterday. When I asked if the science community was resistant to any other train of thought when it comes to the beginning of life, I was not trying to infuse religion into the discussion. Calling intelligent design creationism is a fallacy. This would be like me automatically calling someone who believes in evolution an atheist. Is that a true statement? I hope we would agree it is not. Just because the science community has agreed as of late that the theory of evolution is probable without any proof, does not mean we should take it as fact or stop searching for alternatives to the age old question "where did we come from?".
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
If anything, belief in evolution requires faith in the assumptions of numerous scientists hoping for the explanation that which they cannot find. Just like no religion has been proven to be true, each religion requires faith. Does that mean evolution is a religion?
ReplyDeleteI like that; evolution might be a form of religion with faith based in science. One could believe the supreme architect is either God or the Cosmos.
ReplyDeleteSorry my brain is still asleep today.
i am surprised at the opinion of many that evolution has not been proven. Just because they haven't found the "missing link" the significant evidence found with many species is more than convincing. "evolution" just doesn't refer to humans.
Since i don't have a Yahoo or Google account, where will this go? Carole
I have found that many people believe in a higher power and evolution under the idea that the initial life was formed by a higher power and evolution is a way for living things to adapt.
ReplyDeleteI would say that because evolution is devoid of the spiriturality normally inherent in the various world religions, and missing the belief in a higher power also, then no, in that context evolution cannot be viewed as a religion.
ReplyDeleteI do not believe that one can believe in a higher power and evolution in the truest sense. This is where clarification between evolution, adaptation, and speciation come into play. Many use these words interchangeably which is confusing.
ReplyDeleteEvolution: the process of species changing over time (speciation). This process is not driven towards some ultimate goal of perfection. Instead it is simply a function of a species responding to the current environment (biotic & abiotic) in which it is living. Genetic mutations occur all the time in living things during sexual reproduction. Some mutations make an individual more competitive in a given situation (e.g. more fur in a cold environment), some mutations make an indivuaual less competitive in a given environment (e.g. more fur in a hot climate). In either case the mutation may have a limited affect (neither good or bad) but still some are furrier than others and pass along that trait to their offspring. If the environment in which the species is found. changes from hot to cold then the individuals that have more fur will likely become more competitive, (e.g. able to spend more time looking for food as they are warmer) and so they are more likely to be more successful over time in passing on more of their genetic material than the hairless versions of that same species. Thus they have ADAPTED to the change in climate. But if this is locally happening in one part of the population (at the northern extreme for example) while simoultaneously it is getting warming at the southern extreme of the population (so they are becoming more hairless). These ADAPTATIONS may eventually lead to these once common species EVOLVING into separate species (EVOLTION) meaning though genetically related they are now genetically different enough that they can no longer interbreed.
ReplyDeleteThis is an example of how these words are interrelated (not interchangeable) and one example of how this process we call evolution can occur. READ DARWINS Origin of Species if you need evidence (there are many other works that have evidence as well).....the evidence does exist but science does not tell you what to believe, you have to be convinced that the evidence substantiates the idea. Furthermore, science assumes that we will continually improve upon the current understanding so it is not static and it expects to change as new evidence is presented, found.
ReplyDeleteA nice simple explanation of the words:
ReplyDeleteTheory, hypothesis, law....
hxxp://physics.suite101.com/article.cfm/theory_vs__hypothesis_vs__law
From Chad: "Just because the science community has agreed as of late that the theory of evolution is probable without any proof, does not mean we should take it as fact or stop searching for alternatives to the age old question "where did we come from?". "
ReplyDeleteAs a critical thinker, I challenge this statement. Science has evidence to support the theory of evolution...the fossil record....start with Darwin's work...many other pieces follow, which you can find printed in peer reviewed journals. Which means the scientific community accepts the evidence as supporting the theory. This is not to say the scientific community is always right...thus the continued push to find new evidence to better explain the things that the theory does not do well.
This process of peer reviewing is done in attempt to hold up the standard of bringing evidence, vs. simple assertions unsupported by evidence to the table. This is the same process that was used to develop the technologies we enjoy today (e.g. this blog on the internet, medical (cholesteral reducing meds) etc.) Again, science is dynamic, constantly changing but be careful in flippantly suggesting that it is just a bunch of folks that have agreed to agree on an idea because they like it and it serves their purpose.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Heather's suggestion that its possible to reconcile belief in a higher power as well as belief in evolution. Here one can hold both of these ideas as true, based on evidence that supports each repsectively, while also allowing to "continually improve upon the current understanding so it is not static and expects to change as new evidence is presented" again, for the both the belief in a higher power and evolution.
ReplyDeleteTo Scott's point, if evolution is an element or part of God's creation, it seems to me that it would necessarily (inherently) have a spiritual aspect.