Creation & EvolutionForum for the discussion of this important topic. This forum is open to non-believers. There is a Christians-only forum in the Christians-only section too.
Still, so many people resist believing in evolution. Where does the resistance come from?
It comes, I'm sorry to say, from religion. And from bad religion. You won't find any opposition to the idea of evolution among sophisticated, educated theologians. It comes from an exceedingly retarded, primitive version of religion, which unfortunately is at present undergoing an epidemic in the United States. Not in Europe, not in Britain, but in the United States.
To be honest, while I empathize with some of his points, his broad attack on "religion" as a whole seems kind of off base. He does make some qualifying remarks that theologians are exempt from some of his criticisms, but the sweep of his brush is a bit broad for my taste. I don't honestly know if this will do anything other than help polarize "us" and "them" in the minds of the religious.
He also gives a good response to the common PRATT of the "randomness" of evolution:
The idea that evolution could be "random" seems to frighten people. Is it random?
This is a spectacular misunderstanding. If it was random, then of course it couldn't possibly have given rise to the fantastically complicated and elegant forms that we see. Natural selection is the important force that drives evolution. Natural selection is about as non-random a force as you could possibly imagine. It can't work unless there is some sort of variation upon which to work. And the source of variation is mutation. Mutation is random only in the sense that it is not directed specifically toward improvement. It is natural selection that directs evolution toward improvement. Mutation is random in that it's not directed toward improvement.
The idea that evolution itself is a random process is a most extraordinary travesty. I wonder if it's deliberately put about maliciously or whether these people honestly believe such a preposterous absurdity. Of course evolution isn't random. It is driven by natural selection, which is a highly non-random force.
To be honest, while I empathize with some of his points, his broad attack on "religion" as a whole seems kind of off base. He does make some qualifying remarks that theologians are exempt from some of his criticisms, but the sweep of his brush is a bit broad for my taste.
I don't know; it's not that broad a brush. He's just saying that Christian fundemantalism, with the literal interpretation and all, is the 'bad' and 'exceedingly retarded, primitive' version of religion.
To be honest, I'm glad to see he has mellowed.
__________________ The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.
- Richard P. Feynman
It comes from an exceedingly retarded, primitive version of religion, which unfortunately is at present undergoing an epidemic in the United States. Not in Europe, not in Britain, but in the United States.
Hahahaha...I think he has been running around this site looking for material.
__________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Like an unchecked cancer, hate corrodes the personality and eats away its vital unity. Hate destroys a man's sense of values and his objectivity. It causes him to describe the beautiful as ugly and the ugly as beautiful, and to confuse the true with the false and the false with the true.
One who condones evils is just as guilty as the one who perpetrates it.
Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.
Martin Luther King.Jr
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Always Dance When Life Gives You The chance!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
__________________ "That's where the truth lies, right down here in the gut. Do you know you have more nerve endings in your gut than you have in your head? You can look it up. I know some of you are going to say "I did look it up, and that's not true." That's 'cause you looked it up in a book. Next time, look it up in your gut. I did. My gut tells me that's how our nervous system works."
I don't know; it's not that broad a brush. He's just saying that Christian fundemantalism, with the literal interpretation and all, is the 'bad' and 'exceedingly retarded, primitive' version of religion.
To be honest, I'm glad to see he has mellowed.
Funny thing, the same thought crossed my mind when I read the OP. Its true, great minds do think alike.
Cze
__________________ “You know, the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common, they don’t alter their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit their views, which can be uncomfortable, if you happen to be one of the facts that needs altering,” -Doctor, THE FACE OF EVIL
"A celibate clergy is an especially good idea, because it tends to suppress any hereditary propensity toward fanaticism." -- Carl Edward Sagan
The problem I have with Dawkins is that he's suggested too many times that religion is the problem and I remember seeing posts at IG talking about Dawkins being their favorite Militant Atheist. I reluctantly use his work anymore because I am no enemy to religion, but to stupidity.
__________________ California State Law:No vehicle without a driver may exceed 60 miles per hour. New York State Law:The penalty for jumping off a building exceeding 500ft in height is death.
Hitler burned people like Anne Frank for being Jewish: For that, we call him evil.
Jesus burns people like Anne Frank for being Jewish forever: For that, Christians call him good. ~ todangst
The problem I have with Dawkins is that he's suggested too many times that religion is the problem and I remember seeing posts at IG talking about Dawkins being their favorite Militant Atheist. I reluctantly use his work anymore because I am no enemy to religion, but to stupidity.
Meh. There's no debate anymore about Dawkins's rather extreme public position on organized religion; there hasn't been for years. We can cry over long-spilt milk, or we can try to take his comments on their own merits and appreciate when he's on target, like this time.
__________________ And since they could not bear the truth, these singers, who might in some other place have been wise, were squeezed under the terrible weight of the warren's secret until they gulped out a fine folly--about dignity and acquiescence and anything else that could make believe that the rabbit loved the shining wire. But one strict rule they had; oh yes, the strictest. No one must ever ask where another rabbit was and anyone who asked 'Where?'--except in a song or a poem--must be silenced.
It comes, I'm sorry to say, from religion. And from bad religion.
Bad Religion rawks! \m/ (it's early, give me a minute to adjust)
You won't find any opposition to the idea of evolution among sophisticated, educated theologians. It comes from an exceedingly retarded, primitive version of religion, which unfortunately is at present undergoing an epidemic in the United States. Not in Europe, not in Britain, but in the United States.
True, but it does exist in Europe as well. Not to the same degree, but it's there. If historical and socioeconomic conditions in Europe were more like the US, it would probably suffer creationism just as badly.
My American friends tell me that you are slipping towards a theocratic Dark Age. Which is very disagreeable for the very large number of educated, intelligent and right-thinking people in America. Unfortunately, at present, it's slightly outnumbered by the ignorant, uneducated people who voted Bush in.
But the broad direction of history is toward enlightenment, and so I think that what America is going through at the moment will prove to be a temporary reverse. I think there is great hope for the future. My advice would be, Don't despair, these things pass.
That's good to know.
Originally Posted by mikeynov
To be honest, while I empathize with some of his points, his broad attack on "religion" as a whole seems kind of off base. He does make some qualifying remarks that theologians are exempt from some of his criticisms, but the sweep of his brush is a bit broad for my taste. I don't honestly know if this will do anything other than help polarize "us" and "them" in the minds of the religious.
He also gives a good response to the common PRATT of the "randomness" of evolution:
I agree. He does make a few swipes that he knows will anger many people, like in his description of the dark side of religion, he mentions the Roman Catholic Church alongside Islamic terrorism, militant Zionism, the Northern Ireland conflict, genocide in Yugoslavia, and oppression of women in Saudi Arabia/Afghanistan. I don't agree with the RCC on a lot of things, but that's going a tad too far in my book.
Originally Posted by Big Rob
Dawkins knows what's up. Stupid Americans.
It's not really stupidity, so much as a narrow fundamentalist mentality washed down with a good amount of anti-intellectualism and sciencephobia. Forgive them, for they know not what they do.
__________________ Veritas omnia vincit.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
The problem I have with Dawkins is that he's suggested too many times that religion is the problem and I remember seeing posts at IG talking about Dawkins being their favorite Militant Atheist. I reluctantly use his work anymore because I am no enemy to religion, but to stupidity.
As someone who has met Dawkins in person (and posed for a photo with him), I can say that he is absolutely delightful in person. As someone who has heard him speak to a largely atheist audience of skeptics, he can come across as abrasively, militantly anti-religious. At The Amazing Meeting 3 in Las Vegas, he basically agreed with God-Hater Penn Gilette that there's no difference between a run of the mill Church/Mosque/Temple goer and the 9/11 hijackers.
I've got a point on this issue and I'll get to it in a moment, but I first want to state that my user ID here is a bit of a subterfuge. My usual user ID is UnrepentantSinner, sometimes fully expressed as UnrepentantSinnerAtheist. But I vociferously disavow any God-Hating attitudes on the part of atheists, skeptics or non-believing evolution supporters. In the end it's all about whether the facts support your position or do they not.
Ultimately, that is why I will continue to cite Dawkins (the atheist)... as I will similarly continue to cite Dr. Douglas Theobald (the Christian and author of the "29 Evidences T.O. essay) since they are interested - on the topic of evolution specifically - in the facts, and not their personal agendas.
Maybe it's just me, but I'd gladly embrace a Pentecostal, slain in the spirit and speaking in tongues Christian as my fellow evolution advocate, than someone who accepts evolution because to do othewise might upset the apple cart of their Weltanschauung.
__________________ (The Library of Alexandria) questioned the permanence of the stars, but did not question the justice of slavery - Carl Sagan in Cosmos
Linear Mode
