Thursday, April 8, 2010
Evolutionary Theory.
A theory is a "comprehensive explanation supported by abundant evidence". To say that evolution is a theory, it has evidence, but it cant be proven exactly. That doesn't mean it is not true, just not proven. Because of the evidence people chose to believe it, but not all people do. A lot of people take offense to evolution for a couple of reasons. One reason is that a lot of people don;t want to think that our smart and powerful people came from what they refer to as dumb monkeys. Although, apes are very intelligent, and people just don;t see it that way. When you do look at the similarities, it makes some sense. Another reason that people take offense is because people believe in God, and that God created man. (This is where I stand) I think people also don't believe it because they don;t see evolution happen, because it takes so long for noticeable change, that it doesn't even seem like change. I think it is just one of the explanations of the natural world. I am sure that Darwin and such people weren't trying to screw with peoples heads and bash on all the other beliefs out there. They observed things, and saw some sort of connection and ran with it. That is all. Just like all of the other theories out there.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Great response! Sometimes when I watch shows on monkeys/apes I get freaked by how similar they are to human beings and it makes it hard to not believe that we come from monkeys.
ReplyDeleteDanielle I liked how you said evolution is just like any other theory out there. Evolution seems to get bashed by those who are religious, but it could go both ways. You are right that most likely no one was, or even today is trying to be offensive but with conflicting ideologies conflict is bound to be present!
ReplyDeleteWell, no, Darwin wasn't trying to screw with people's heads. He was terrified of what he found. He hid it and didn't publish for 20 years, until another scientist almost beat him to the punch. He was actually somewhat appalled by the revelation and spent many years proving it to himself and preparing the defense of it. He said, "At last gleams of light have come, and I am almost convinced (quite contrary to opinion I started with) that species are not (it is like confessing a murder) immutable. "
ReplyDeleteIf it had not been Darwin, it would have been someone else. Wallace came to the same conclusion independently. Similar ideas had been floating around for a minimum of 100 years before Darwin. Evolution was already in the wind. Darwin just came up with the convincing mechanism. It was an idea whose time had come. If genetics and DNA had been "discovered" first, evolution would have had to come out of the discovery. Animal and plant breeding were already tweeking people's minds.
I agree when you say that people take offense to the idea of evolution. I think people are threatened by the idea because it opposes the idea that God created Earth. My beliefs that evolution is an explanation for how God has created Earth, the two are intertwined.
ReplyDeleteVery well put. I do think that the theory of evolution gets bashed on for completely pointless reasons. If someone has a religious problem with it, then so be it. And I like how you said that Darwin wasn't trying to upset anybody. People take offense when offense wasn't meant to be given. Good post.
ReplyDeleteI think you have so many good idea about the evolution.I do think that the idea our people was created by God is good.My beliefs that evolution is an explanation for how God has created Earth, the two are intertwined
ReplyDeleteI don't think for the most part, science and religion are really opposed to each other. Except with the case of the early catholic church, which opposed for power, and refusal to admit to having faliable leadership. Many religious people have been scientists, any many great scientists have been religious men. The religious man pursues science to see how God did it, and the non-religious scientist does more to satisfy his own and others curiosity.
ReplyDeleteThe difference is that a religious person might be more comfortable to say "God did it, I don't know how, don't care," and be happy living in ignorance however, the scientist denying existence of a god however needs an explanation for life using only physics and probability to comfortably complete a world view. I think this attracts scientists cynical to religion, and their cynicism breeds religion's sometimes cynicism of science. My version of why it probably offends people.
Me, I think most of my cynicism is bred from the way it's presented in most class texts as a collection of watered down guesses, sometimes with numbers, justified as the average startup's cost projections, or the cost estimates of the healthcare bill. Show me science, and I will consider. I am yet to be satisfied.