39
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 209:
Line 209: + + + + +
→The atheist and/or evolutionary view
: What other view than evolution would atheists subscribe to?
: What other view than evolution would atheists subscribe to?
: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 05:21, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 05:21, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
:: That's not true, though. What Julian Huxley described ''isn't'' the Theory of Evolution. It states nothing about either the origin of Earth, the origin of life on it or the existence of a god or gods. It says ''only'' that the variations of life we see today evolved from earlier forms via natural selection. That's all. There is nothing that says that, for example, a deity didn't create the Universe and Earth, plant life on it and created the rules by which evolution would occur. It's compatible with theism in general, just not the majority of creation myths.
:: Atheism means a statement about the nonexistence of gods. Evolution is a biological theory, it doesn't even come ''close'' to touching that topic. You can't have either a theistic or atheistic scientific theory because the scientific method cannot test the supernatural. Secular is the adjective which best describes a scientific theory in regards to the existence of gods. That is, it's entirely unrelated.
:: There are two alternatives (that I can think of) to the Theory of Evolution that an atheist could subscribe to which have also been, at some point, well-accepted: Spontaneous Generation <ref>http://biology.clc.uc.edu/courses/bio114/spontgen.htm</ref> and [[Jean-Baptiste_Lamarck|Lamarckism]].
:: --[[User:Rspeed|Rspeed]] 19:45, 11 September 2008 (EDT)