Difference between revisions of "Evolutionism"

Revision as of 14:22, June 12, 2009

Monkey see, 
                Monkey do,

               I use to want to

                   Be one too

     He doesn't have a bedtime

  But he doesn't eat green beans

    Monkeys get to play around

   The whole day long it seems.

He doesn't have to brush his teeth

       Or have to comb his hair

   If he had toys I'll bet his Dad

Wouldn't make him have to share.

  But Mommy said the monkeys

       Don't ever watch TV -

        That's when I decided

         I'd rather just be ME.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-'''Evolutionism''', as opposed to [[Creationism]], is the ''advocacy of or belief in biological evolution''.<ref>"evolutionism." The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2004. 20 Mar. 2007. <Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/evolutionism>.</ref> Therefore one who ''believes in or supports a [[evolution|theory of evolution]]''<ref>"evolutionist." Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. 21 Mar. 2007. <Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/evolutionist>.</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.
+ Monkey see,
+                 Monkey do,
-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 [[world view]] or [[presupposition]] aspect of the scientific theory of evolution. The term is not necessarily used as a world view unto itself, but is more based off of and is possibly an extension of a variety of other world views including [[Materialism]], [[Naturalism]]<ref>[http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA601.html CA601: Evolution and Naturalism] - TalkOrigins Archive</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.
+                I use to want to
-{{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 - AllAboutPhilosophy] - Accessed on March 22, 2007.</ref>}}
-==Theistic Evolution==
+                    Be one too
-[[Theistic Evolution|Theistic Evolutionists]] 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>[http://www.catholic.net/RCC/Periodicals/Dossier/0102-97/Article3.html Mark Brumley, Evolution and the Pope]</ref>
-Roughly twice as many people in the U.S. believe in this type of evolution(30%), as opposed to godless evolution that most atheist believe in(just a mere 13% of people). However both of these combined is still less people than the ammount of people who beleive in Young Earth Creation(48%), as told by The Bible<ref>http://hubpages.com/hub/Poll-Most-Americans-Dont-Believe-Evolution</ref>.
-==Foundational question/starting point==
+      He doesn't have a bedtime
-All the viewpoints take a ''step of faith'' as some might refer to it. In other words, there is a common starting point or foundational question (it's a God-related question) that each one asks, and then forms their conclusions around.
-===According to biblical Creationists (Young Earth)===
+   But he doesn't eat green beans
-* God exists (world view)
-** 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 world view.
-===According to biblical Theistic Evolutionists (Old Earth)===
+     Monkeys get to play around
-There is disagreement among [[Theistic Evolution]]ists, as not all hold that God is not involved presently in His creation.
-'''Impersonal God'''
+    The whole day long it seems.
-* There is no personal/involved God (world view)
-** 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 world view.
-'''Personal God'''
+ He doesn't have to brush his teeth
-* There is a personal/involved God (world view)
-** 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 world view.
-===According to Atheistic Evolutionists===
+        Or have to comb his hair
-Some proponents of the scientific theory of evolution reject the idea of a philosophy or world view that guides their conclusions in scientific experimentation.  However evolutionists who are 'strong atheists' and who make a positive assertion that there is no God, do in fact have a world view; whereas 'weak atheists', who maintain there is probably no God due to lack of any objective evidence of Him, rely on science.
-'''Strong Atheism'''
+    If he had toys I'll bet his Dad
-* There is no God (world view)
-** 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 world view.
-'''Weak Atheism'''
+Wouldn't make him have to share.
-* So far, there is no objective proof of God
-** Therefore, we do not need to interpret evidence to fit in with the "fact" of God's existence
-*** Thus science is not done on the basis of there being a God (i.e. [[naturalism]]) (unless His existence becomes objectively proven)
-**** For [[Weak Atheism|weak atheists]], science comes before [[Naturalism]]. They (presumably) base their world view on the Science.
-===Comparison===
+   But Mommy said the monkeys
-The various viewpoints can be compared in general ways as they all have some sort of starting point. The general Creationist starting point is God, which then all the universe is based on including that of science. Some ''Theistic Evolutionists'' hold to a similar God idea, yet emphasize a somewhat secondary origin<ref>Some Theistic Evolutionists believe that God created the universe and yet He is no longer involved in it. Therefore "secondary origin" is referring to the idea that God is the origin of the universe, but not necessarily ''You and Me''.</ref> in the evolutionary process. Atheistic evolutionists say that we must prove God by science, therefore their intellectual starting point is science itself.
-==Controversy==
+        Don't ever watch TV -
-===Usage of Terminology===
-The term ''evolutionism'' uses the suffix ''-ism'', which is commonly used to designate varieties of philosophical opinion, and some people who support evolution prefer to use other terms. Others are happy to call themselves evolutionists, and the terms have been in common use for a century. For example, the most popular American proponent of evolution called himself an evolutionist, <ref>"I count myself among the evolutionists", S.J. Gould [http://www.stephenjaygould.org/library/gould_fact-and-theory.html], also "Evolutionists have been very clear about this distinction of fact and theory". [http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html]</ref> and his obituary read "Evolutionist Stephen Jay Gould dead".<ref>S.F. Chronicle, 1981 [http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2002/05/21/MN175165.DTL]</ref> This is all part of the controversy over evolution itself (see [[Origins debate]]).
-Some Atheistic/Agnostic Evolutionists say that the term ''Evolutionism'' is simply a false Creationist perception,
+         That's when I decided
-or pejorative assertion that science represents merely another religion. They disagree that the theory of evolution is based on a [[philosophy]] or [[world view]]. They say that the perception finds no grounding in reality, other than as a rhetorical dramatization. However, according to creationists, this disagreement arises from a misunderstanding of terms. Biblical [[Young Earth Creationism|Young Earth Creationists]] hold both terms in philosophically equal light, up to a certain point. They would say that the term "Evolutionism" has the same or very similar meaning to "Creationism" as it relates to a supposed philosophical/foundational starting point or question (does God exist?). They say the term "Evolutionism" refers to a subset of a combination of world views, while the scientific theory of evolution is the result of the ''Evolutionist'' presupposition. In other words, they say that Evolutionism is the collective world view behind the scientific theory of evolution. However, that's where the similarities end with Creationism.
-===Religion and Evolutionism===
+          I'd rather just be ME.
-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. M. Green, a Creationist, put it this way in his ''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>http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/FTrials/conlaw/evolution.htm</ref>. Some prominent Americans seriously question evolution<ref>http://mikehuckabeepresident2008.blogspot.com/2007/05/mike-huckabee-does-not-believe-in.html</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===
-There is a cult of personality and type of religiosity currently surrounding Charles Darwin.  [[Stephen Jay Gould]] wrote the following in 1978: "[A]ll theories [of natural selection] cite God in their support, and ... Darwin comes close to this status among evolutionary biologists".<ref>http://www.bradburyac.mistral.co.uk/dar1.html</ref>  In 2002, Michael White similarly wrote: "Of course today, for biologists, Darwin is second only to God, and for many he may rank still higher."<ref>http://www.bradburyac.mistral.co.uk/dar1.html</ref>
-===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>http://web.newsguy.com/rubyredinger/age.html</ref>, which is well established by archaeology and secular history.  Accordingly, the birth of Adam can be placed at approximately 4,163 BC and the initial creation of the universe six days prior.
-==Quotes==
-'''''Evolutionism requires faith'' quotes (by Evolutionists)''':
-{{cquote|'''Michael Ruse'''<br />''Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a [[secular religion]] -- a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality. I am an ardent evolutionist and an ex-Christian, 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 religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today.''<ref>MICHAEL RUSE [http://www.omniology.com/HowEvolutionBecameReligion.html HOW EVOLUTION BECAME A RELIGION]</ref>}}
-'''''Evolutionism requires faith'' quotes (by Creationists)''':<ref>[http://www.nwcreation.net/evolutionism.html Evolutionism - Is Evolution a Religion?] - Northwest Creation Network</ref>
-{{cquote|'''L.N. 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>L.N. Matthews, "Introduction" to Charles Darwin, Origin of the Species, pp. x, xi (1971 edition)</ref>''}}
-{{cquote|'''J.W.N. Sullivan'''<br />''The hypothesis that life has developed from inorganic matter is, at present, still an article of faith. <ref>J.W.N. Sullivan, Limitations of Science (1933), p95.</ref>''}}
-{{cquote|'''[[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>R.L. Wysong, The Creation-Evolution Controversy (1981), p. 455.</ref>''}}
-{{cquote|'''T. 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>T. Lessl, Science and the Sacred Cosmos: The Ideological Rhetoric of Carl Sagan," Quarterly Journal of Speech, 71:178 (1985).</ref>''}}
-{{cquote|'''M. Grene'''<br />''"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">M. Grene, Faith of Darwinism," Encounter, November (1959), p49.</ref>''}}
-==See also==
-*[[Creationism]]
-*[[Faith]]
-*[[Humanism]]
-*[[Naturalistic religions]]
-*[[Religion]]
-*[[Theism]]
-==References==
-{{reflist|2}}
-{{Creation vs. evolution}}
-==External links==
-'''Notes'''
-:'''''Affirmative''' articles that attempt to rebut the faith claim of creationists.''
-:'''''Critical''' articles that claim evolutionism involves faith.''
-{| class="wikitable" width="100%"
-! Affirmative !! Critical
-|-
-| valign="top" width="50%"|
-'''TalkOrigins'''
-*[http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA612.html CA612: Evolution requiring faith]
-**[http://creationwiki.org/%28Talk.Origins%29_Evolution_requires_as_much_faith_as_creationism CreationWiki response]
-*[http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA610.html CA610: Evolution religious]
-**[http://creationwiki.org/%28Talk.Origins%29_Evolution_is_a_religion CreationWiki response]
-*[http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA001.html CA001: Evolution is the foundation of an immoral world view]
-**[http://creationwiki.org/%28Talk.Origins%29_Evolution_is_the_foundation_of_an_immoral_worldview CreationWiki response]
-*[http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolphil/metaphysics.html Evolution and Philosophy: Metaphysics]
-'''EvoWiki'''
-*[http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/Evolution_is_the_foundation_of_an_immoral_worldview Evolution is the foundation of an immoral world view]
-| valign="top" width="50%"|
-'''DrDino'''
-* [http://www.drdino.com/articles.php?spec=25 Evolution Is Based On Modern Myths]
-'''Creationists.org'''
-* [http://www.creationists.org/evolutionisreligion.html Evolution is a Religion]
-'''Northwest Creation Network'''
-* [http://www.nwcreation.net/evolutionism.html Evolutionism - Is Evolution a religion?]
-'''Creation Ministries International'''
-* [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/1491/ Evolution as religion]
-* [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/4139 Leading anti-creationist philosopher admits that evolution is a religion]
-'''Answers in Genesis'''
-* [http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2002/0930religion.asp The Religion of Evolution]
-* [http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/the-lie/chapter2.asp Evolution is Religion]
-'''CreationWiki'''
-*[http://creationwiki.org/%28Talk.Origins%29_Evolution_requires_as_much_faith_as_creationism Evolution requires as much faith as creationism] - Rebuttal of TalkOrigins Archive
-*[http://creationwiki.org/%28Talk.Origins%29_Evolution_is_a_religion Evolution is a religion] - Rebuttal of TalkOrigins Archive
-'''Institute for Creation Research'''
-* [http://www.icr.org/article/201/ Evolution is Religion, not Science (1)], [http://www.icr.org/article/455/ (2)]
-|}
-[[Category:Naturalism]]

Difference between revisions of "Evolutionism"

Revision as of 14:22, June 12, 2009

Navigation menu

Search