I hear this and read this a lot, "i don't believe in evolution" or " this person does not believe in evolution". When we say this we a perpetuating the myth that evolution is a belief, when in reality it is a fact. We should say " this person does not accept evolution as a fact". Like in medieval times when a lot of people in Europe did not accept the fact that the earth was round. Most of them did not even understand the science behind it ( most did not know how to read or write). This fact, after it was discovered, took a while before it became accepted by most because it challenge the authority of the church. today evolution is seen by a lot of people as a belief, when in reality it is a fact. So to help people understand this we can start by changing our ( those of us who accept the laws of evolution) way of saying things, instead of saying believe in evolution we should say we accept that evolution is a fact. What do you think?
Why do we say " I believe in evolution"?
by Anti-Christ 89 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
sir82
I believe you are right.
-
-
Chalam
Hi,
I generally keep out of the atheism threads so go easy on me!
Anyhow, what is fact? What can we prove? The big bang? Evolution?
I love science can it be trusted as absolute. For years science said the world was flat and the sun went round the earth.
Some of the greatest scientific discoveries have been absolute until someone found that they actually weren't always right or had flaws.
Newtons's laws. Einstein's theories etc. etc.
I have found in life the more you know about a subject the more you find there is to know.
When science can answer the "big questions" then we might be getting somewhere but I think it will never happen.
1. What happened before the universe began or after it ends?
2. Where is the universe? Are there other dimensions outside the ones we live in?
3. How can we live forever, or create life?
4. What happens after death?
5. Why am I here?
6. Why is there suffering and evil?
Some would say that some of these are inappropriate questions for science and they could be right, but if science is king maybe it should be able to answer the big questions?
All the best,
Stephen
-
Spook
It's a bit of symantics, but I generally agree with the OP sentiment. Here are a few technical thoughts:
1. Evolution is not a fact in the scientific sense of the word. Facts or only datum. There is no datum or forumula, it is not "truthable" to sceintists. Rather it is a theory. The facts of evolution are innumerable, but these serve as evidence for the hypothesis. This does not weaken it, I repeat, this only symantics.
2. There are two different contexts beyond strict science: The first is philosophical epistemology (theory of knowledge) and the second is casual language use in its current social meaning.
In theories you will speak about confirming. Evolution is highly confirmed.
Pilate's question "What is truth?" is actually a good one, despite what JW's and other say as criticism. It's important to consider what we mean by that word.
I will usually simply speak of evolution as known, and if challenged ask for the evidence which disconfirms, for which there is none.
The slope can be pretty slippery. In reality, most people don't KNOW any of these things on either side of the camp. The knowledge is channeled through authorities of one form or another. So, you might say for some people it is accurate to say "believe" instead of making truth claims.
You can get just about anyone to complete ignorance in three questions along the lines of "how do you know that?"
-
drwtsn32
I love science can it be trusted as absolute. For years science said the world was flat and the sun went round the earth.
Would you rather science not change when new evidence or data is discovered? It will always be this way. We will never know everything about everything; science should never be "trusted as absolute."
Some of the greatest scientific discoveries have been absolute until someone found that they actually weren't always right or had flaws.
I don't think any scientists view theories as absolute; they are always open to refinement.
What happened before the universe began or after it ends?
Interesting to think about but from what we can tell it is impossible to answer. There is nothing from before the big bang from which we could try to develop a hypothesis. For the same reason the answer to this question doesn't matter; nothing that existed or happened before the big bang matters anyway as it had no impact on the current universe.
After it ends? Possibly nothing. Possibly something. :) Highly speculative stuff.
Where is the universe? Are there other dimensions outside the ones we live in?
The first question is nonsensical; the universe by definition contains all matter and space-time. It doesn't exist "somewhere."
Other dimensions? Possibly, but they aren't spatial dimensions we can interact with like the "big three."
How can we live forever, or create life?
Extending human life is something science can tackle. Same with the creation of life from non-life.
What happens after death?
We already have a scientific answer to that.
Why am I here?
That's a philosophical question, not a science one.
Why is there suffering and evil?
Again, not a question for science to answer.
The fact that science can't even come close to answering everything does not mean that the answers it can provide are useless.
-
Anti-Christ
Okay I am not talking about cosmology and philosophy I am talking biology, evolution is a fact. There are many details we do not know yet and there are many theories but evolution does happen. Viruses and bacteria evolve and adapt to their environment. Do you contest this? Do you accept this as being a fact? We see adaptation in complex life also. This is all evolution and natural selection. We have many many fossils of hominids that were our "cousins" and there is clear proof that they had tools and used fire but now they are extinct. All of this is fact.
-
Anti-Christ
Hi,
I generally keep out of the atheism threads so go easy on me!
Hello. First this has nothing to do with atheism it's about evolution. Second I will be gentle
-
BluesBrother
OK, then
We should say " this person does not accept evolution as a fact".
I do not accept evolution as a fact because I have yet to have any facts presented to me to make me believe (or accept ) it
-
Anti-Christ
So you do not accept that bacteria and viruses evolve?