Changes

Jump to: navigation, search

Evolutionism

204 bytes added, 19:39, 9 September 2019
linked [[detraction]]
'''Evolutionism''', as opposed to [[Creationism]], is the ''advocacy of or belief in biological evolution''.<ref>[http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Usage+and+context+of+%22evolutionism%22 "Evolutionism"] (2009). ''The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language'', 4th ed. (Boston: Houghton Mifflin). Retrieved from The Free Dictionary on September 14, 2014.</ref> Therefore , one who ''believes in or supports a [[evolution|theory of evolution]]''<ref>[http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/evolutionist "Evolutionist"]. ''Random House Dictionary''. (New York: Random House). Retrieved from Dictionary.com Unabridged on September 14, 2014.</ref> would be referred to as an ''evolutionist''. Evolutionism, used in a general sense, encompasses ''any'' type of biological evolutionist. Broken down into two categories, "Evolutionism" and "Evolutionists" usually involve Atheistic/Agnostic Evolutionists (evolution without God) and Theistic Evolutionists (evolution with God). Those categories can be further broken down, but they are the main two.
The term evolutionism is used differently in different circles of thought. Generally [[Young Earth Creationism|Young Earth Creationists]] use it as a reference to what they believe is the [[worldview]] or [[presupposition]] aspect of the scientific theory of evolution. The term is not necessarily used as a worldview unto itself, but is more based off of on and is possibly an extension of a variety of other worldviews including [[Materialism]], [[Naturalism (philosophy)|Naturalism]],<ref>Multiple references:
*[http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA601.html "CA601: Evolution and naturalism"] (2004). TalkOrigins Archive. Retrieved on September 14, 2014.
*CreationWiki response: [http://creationwiki.org/CA601 "Evolution requires naturalism (Talk.Origins)"] (2014). CreationWiki. Retrieved on September 14, 2014.</ref>, and [[Humanism]] in its broadest sense. Many that hold to the theory of evolution have been known to be [[Atheism|atheists]] as well, but this does not represent the entirety or whole.
{{cquote|''Evolutionism is a '''world-view''', which seeks to explain every aspect of this world in which we live. It encompasses a wide variety of topics, from astronomy to chemistry to biology. At its core, it teaches that there were different stages in the evolution of our universe...''<ref>[http://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/evolutionism.htm "Evolutionism—A broad overview"] (2007). All About Philosophy. Accessed on September 14, 2014.</ref>}}
==Theistic Evolution==
[[Theistic Evolution|Theistic Evolutionists]] ists believe that God created the universe and did not intervene directly in the evolutionary process. In general, theistic evolutionists accept the evolutionist ideas of the age of the earth and common descent. Theistic evolutionists believe that at some point God intervened in a metaphysical fashion to give souls to some small group of human ancestors. The Catholic Church holds that this is consistent with the Catholic faith.<ref>Brumley, Mark (January/February 1997). [httphttps://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.catholic.net/RCC/Periodicals/Dossier/0102-97/Article3.html "Evolution and the pope"]. ''Catholic Dossier''. Retrieved from Catholic.net as archived at Internet Archive on September 14, 2014.</ref>Roughly twice as many people in the U.S. believe in this type of evolution (30%), as opposed to godless evolution that most atheists believe in (just a mere 13% of people). However both of these combined is still less fewer people than the amount of people who believe in Young Earth Creation (48%), as told by the Bible.<ref>College politico (2008). [http://hubpages.com/hub/Poll-Most-Americans-Dont-Believe-Evolution "Poll: Most Americans don't believe evolution"]. ''HubPages''. Retrieved on September 14, 2014.</ref>.
==Foundational question/starting point==
===According to biblical Creationists (Young Earth)===
* God exists (worldview)
** Therefore , we need to explain everything based on that "fact"
*** Thus science is done on the basis that "God exists"
**** The Bible comes ''before'' science. The science is based on the worldview.
'''Impersonal God'''
* There is no personal/involved God (worldview)
** Therefore , we need to explain everything based on that "fact"
*** Thus science is done on the basis that God is not involved in His creation
**** ''Theistic Evolutionism'' comes ''before'' the ''Scientific Theory of Evolution''. The science is based on the worldview.
'''Personal God'''
* There is a personal/involved God (worldview)
** Therefore , we need to explain everything based on that "fact"
*** Thus science is done on the basis that there is a "personal God"
**** ''Theistic Evolutionism'' comes ''before'' the ''Scientific Theory of Evolution''. The science is based on the worldview.
'''Strong Atheism'''
* There is no God (worldview)
** Therefore , we need to explain everything based on that "fact"
*** Thus science is done on the basis of there being no God (i.e. [[naturalism]])
**** Naturalism comes ''before'' the science. The science is based on the worldview.
===Religion and Evolutionism===
Some Creationists point out that they see various religious aspects, not in the theory of evolution itself (although they don't exclude that necessarily), but in the Evolutionists themselves. Some will say how Evolutionists have a ''religious fervor'' over what Creationists believe is false science. Some Evolutionists have historically misunderstood this for Creationists labeling science itself as a religion. Dr. Marjorie Grene, a philosopher, put it this way in her article "The Faith of Darwinism" (emphasis added).:
{{cquote|''Today the tables are turned. The modified, but still characteristically Darwinian theory has itself become an orthodoxy, preached by its adherents with '''religious fervor''', and doubted, they feel, only by a few muddlers imperfect in scientific faith.''<ref name="mgreen" />}}
Evolution has been a recent source of controversy in the [[United States]].<ref>Linder, Doug (2014). [http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/FTrials/conlaw/evolution.htm "The evolution controversy"]. University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law website. Retrieved on September 15, 2014.</ref>. Some prominent Americans seriously question evolution,<ref>BSR (May 6, 2007). [http://mikehuckabeepresident2008.blogspot.com/2007/05/mike-huckabee-does-not-believe-in.html "Mike Huckabee does not believe in evolution alone"]. Mike Huckabee President 2016. Retrieved on September 15, 2014.</ref>, based on a feeling that it conflicts with religious beliefs. However, according to Evolutionists, at least one aspect of religion and evolution is not mutually exclusive. Some deeply religious evolutionists believe that God set evolution into effect, which is no [[detraction ]] to His majesty. This is referring to the theory of [[Theistic Evolution]].
===Religiosity and the cult of personality surrounding Charles Darwin===
===Biblical Young Earth Creationist's problem with a Biblical Old Earth===
Taking the Bible literally, there are no gaps permitting an undocumented period of time between the creation week and the fall of the temple in Jerusalem in 587 BC ,<ref>Redinger, Ruby (2007). [httphttps://web.archive.org/web/20070701035655/http://web.newsguy.com/rubyredinger/age.html "Biblical age of the Earth"]. Biblical Age of the Earth. Retrieved on September 15, 2014 from July 1, 2007 archive at Internet Archive.</ref>, which is well established by archaeology and secular history. Accordingly, the creation of Adam can be placed at approximately 4,163 BC and the initial creation of the universe six days prior.
==Quotes=='''''Evolutionism supporting the position that evolutionism requires faith''''':<ref>[http://www.nwcreation.net/evolutionquotes.html "Evolutionism quotes"] (2004). Northwest Creation Network. Retrieved on September 15, 2014.</ref>=={{cquote|'''DrJ. MW. Ruse N. Sullivan (evolutionistscience author)'''<br />''Evolution The hypothesis that life has developed from inorganic matter is promoted , at present, still an article of faith....''<ref>Sullivan, John W.N. (1933). ''The Limitations of Science'' (New York: The Viking Press), p. 95. Quoted in review by its practitioners as more than mere science[https://books. Evolution google.com/books?id=EPoPAAAAIAAJ&q=%22The+hypothesis+that+life+has+developed+from+inorganic+matter+is promulgated as an ideology, a [[secular religion]] — a full-fledged alternative to Christianity+at+present, with meaning and morality. I am +still+an ardent evolutionist and an ex-Christian+article+of+faith, but I must admit +although+various+chemists+have+put+forward+various+hypothetical+accounts+as+to+how+they+think+it+might+have+been+done%22&dq=%22The+hypothesis+that in this one complaint — and Mr. Gish +life+has+developed+from+inorganic+matter+is but one ,+at+present,+still+an+article+of many +faith,+although+various+chemists+have+put+forward+various+hypothetical+accounts+as+to make +how+they+think+it — the literalists are absolutely right+might+have+been+done%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=LzwaVKkn5_PwAd-cgeAP&ved=0CBQQ6AEwAA ''New Catholic World'' [preview&#93;], vol. Evolution is a religion138, p. This was true of evolution in 520. Preview retrieved from GoogleBooks on September 17, 2014.</ref>}}{{cquote|'''Dr. M.G. Grene'''<br />''Today the beginningtables are turned. The modified, and it is true of evolution but still todaycharacteristically Darwinian theory has itself become an orthodoxy, preached by its adherents with religious fervor, and doubted, they feel, only by a few muddlers imperfect in scientific faith.''<refname="mgreen">RuseGrene, Michael Marjorie (May 13, 2000November 1959). "The Faith of Darwinism". ''Encounter'', p. 49. Reprinted in Grene, Marjorie (1974), [httphttps://wwwbooks.omniologygoogle.com/HowEvolutionBecameReligion.html "Saving Darwinism from the Darwinians."]. books?id=BUL8BAAhg4YC&pg=PA187&lpg=PA187&dq=%22characteristically+Darwinian+theory+has+itself+become+an+orthodoxy,%22&source=bl&ots=QmawriJpLu&sig=6Gu2gx0X5pIQkM31bX9PkMs5Klk&hl=en&sa=X&ei=eCwaVM6gG5TP8QHNhIGQCg&ved=0CCAQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=%22characteristically%20Darwinian%20theory%20has%20itself%20become%20an%20orthodoxy%2C%22&f=false ''National PostThe Knower and the Known''] (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press), p. B-3187. Retrieved from Omniology.com as "How evolution became a religion" GoogleBooks on September 1517, 2014. Caution: may be copyrighted; for fair educational use only.</ref>}}
{{cquote|'''Dr. L.H. Matthews'''<br />''The fact of evolution is the backbone of biology, and biology is thus in the peculiar position of being a science founded on an unproved theory—is it then a science or faith?''<ref>Matthews, L. Harrison (1972), "Introduction" to Darwin, Charles (1872), ''The Origin of Species'', 6th ed. (London: J. M. Dent), pp. x-xi. Quoted in "Evolutionism quotes".</ref>}}
{{cquote|'''J.W.N. Sullivan (science author)'''<br />''The hypothesis that life has developed from inorganic matter is, at present, still an article of faith....''<ref>Sullivan, John W.N. (1933). ''The Limitations of Science'' (New York: The Viking Press), p. 95. Quoted in review by [http://books.google.com/books?id=EPoPAAAAIAAJ&q=%22The+hypothesis+that+life+has+developed+from+inorganic+matter+is,+at+present,+still+an+article+of+faith,+although+various+chemists+have+put+forward+various+hypothetical+accounts+as+to+how+they+think+it+might+have+been+done%22&dq=%22The+hypothesis+that+life+has+developed+from+inorganic+matter+is,+at+present,+still+an+article+of+faith,+although+various+chemists+have+put+forward+various+hypothetical+accounts+as+to+how+they+think+it+might+have+been+done%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=LzwaVKkn5_PwAd-cgeAP&ved=0CBQQ6AEwAA ''New Catholic World'' [preview&#93;], vol. 138, p. 520. Preview retrieved from GoogleBooks on September 17, 2014.</ref>}}{{cquote|'''Dr. [[R.L. Wysong]]'''<br />''"Evolution requires plenty of faith; a faith in L-proteins that defy chance formation; a faith in the formation of DNA codes which, if generated spontaneously, would spell only pandemonium; a faith in a primitive environment that, in reality, would fiendishly devour any chemical precursors to life; a faith in experiments that prove nothing but the need for intelligence in the beginning; a faith in a primitive ocean that would not thicken, but would only haplessly dilute chemicals; a faith in natural laws of thermodynamics and biogenesis that actually deny the possibility for the spontaneous generation of life; a faith in future scientific revelations that, when realized, always seem to present more dilemmas to the evolutionists; faith in improbabilities that treasonously tell two stories—one denying evolution, the other confirming the creator; faith in transformations that remain fixed; faith in mutations and natural selection that add to a double negative for evolution; faith in fossils that embarrassingly show fixity through time, regular absence of transitional forms and striking testimony to a worldwide water deluge; a faith in time which proves to only promote degradation in the absence of mind; and faith in reductionism that ends up reducing the materialist's arguments to zero and forcing the need to invoke a supernatural creator."''<ref>Wysong, R.L. (1976). [httphttps://books.google.com/books?id=yNev8Y-xN8YC&pg=PA419&dq=wysong+controversy+%22requires+plenty+of+faith%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=RzgaVKW4FMXy8AHjgYGwAQ&ved=0CBQQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=wysong%20controversy%20%22requires%20plenty%20of%20faith%22&f=false ''The Creation-Evolution Controversy''] (Midland, MI: Inquiry Press), p. 419. Retrieved from GoogleBooks on September 17, 2014.</ref>}}
{{cquote|'''Dr. T.M. Lessl'''<br />''By calling evolution fact, the process of evolution is removed from dispute; it is no longer merely a scientific construct, but now stands apart from humankind and its perceptual frailties. Sagan apparently wishes to accomplish what Peter Berger calls "objectification," the attribution of objective reality to a humanly produced concept . . With evolution no longer regarded as a mere human construct, but now as a part of the natural order of the cosmos, evolution becomes a sacred archetype against which human actions can be weighed. Evolution is a sacred object or process in that it becomes endowed with mysterious and awesome power.''<ref>Lessl, Thomas M. (1985). "Science and the sacred cosmos: the ideological rhetoric of Carl Sagan". ''Quarterly Journal of Speech'', vol. 71, no. 2, p. 178. Quoted in "Evolutionism quotes".</ref>}}
{{cquote|'''Dr. [[Michael Ruse|M.G. GreneRuse]] (evolutionist)'''<br />''Today the tables are turnedEvolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. The modified, but still characteristically Darwinian theory has itself become Evolution is promulgated as an orthodoxyideology, preached by its adherents with religious fervora [[secular religion]] — a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and doubted, they feelmorality. I am an ardent evolutionist and an ex-Christian, only by but I must admit that in this one complaint — and Mr. Gish is but one of many to make it — the literalists are absolutely right. Evolution is a few muddlers imperfect religion. This was true of evolution in scientific faiththe beginning, and it is true of evolution still today.''<ref name="mgreen">GreneRuse, Marjorie Michael (November 1959). "The Faith of Darwinism". ''Encounter''May 13, p. 49. Reprinted in Grene, Marjorie (19742000), . [http://bookswww.googleomniology.com/books?id=BUL8BAAhg4YC&pg=PA187&lpg=PA187&dq=%22characteristically+Darwinian+theory+has+itself+become+an+orthodoxy,%22&source=bl&ots=QmawriJpLu&sig=6Gu2gx0X5pIQkM31bX9PkMs5Klk&hl=en&sa=X&ei=eCwaVM6gG5TP8QHNhIGQCg&ved=0CCAQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=%22characteristically%20Darwinian%20theory%20has%20itself%20become%20an%20orthodoxy%2C%22&f=false HowEvolutionBecameReligion.html "Saving Darwinism from the Darwinians."]. ''The Knower and the KnownNational Post''] (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press), p. 187B-3. Retrieved from GoogleBooks Omniology.com as "How evolution became a religion" on September 1715, 2014. Caution: may be copyrighted; for fair educational use only.</ref>}}
==See also==
*[[Religion]]
*[[Theism]]
*[[Creationism's Trojan Horse]]
*[[Open Question: Why Do evolutionists say 'science is all about making changes' yet don't even consider Biblical Creation as an alternative?]]
==References==
*[http://creationwiki.org/%28Talk.Origins%29_Evolution_is_a_religion Evolution is a religion] - Rebuttal of TalkOrigins Archive
'''Institute for Creation Research'''
* [httphttps://www.icr.org/article/201/ Evolution is Religion, not Science (1)], [httphttps://www.icr.org/article/455/ (2)]
|}
[[Category:Naturalism]]
Block, SkipCaptcha, Upload, edit, move, protect
29,658
edits