Evolution... a Religion?

Evolution is touted as a religion by several people on this board. So, I would like to address this very issue. First let us define Evolution and Religion -

Evolution:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evol...efinition.html

Religion:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...efine:religion
There are various definitions on the web, and above you can see definitions and their source.


Now, is Evolution a Religion? Well, take a look at various definitions of evolution cited by the above article. Then take a look at the various definitions of the word religion in the other link. Note that between the two, Evolution is never defined as belief in any 'divine power', nor does Evolution 'a practice of worship, action, and/or thought related to that deity'.

Note, also, that never does Evolution specifiy anywhere that there is a divine power, and honestly leaves the question of whether or not one exists open. It only explains where organisms came from in terms of common ancestry. Note, also, that it does not explain where the first organism came from (which is abiogenesis - a completely separate scientific study), it does not try to explain the meaning of life or why organisms behave (which involves psychology, and behavioral psychology, two independent scientific fields of study from Evolution).

I wrote this though because quite frequently I hear YEC's and anti-evolutionists specificy things like evolution is a religion or evolution involves being anti-god or anti-christ.

Well, in all the time I've studied evolution, I have never once heard the theory of evolution try to prove or deny the existence of God, the holiness of Christ, or even the holiness of any other religious figure from Bhudda to Muhammed. Evolution is not theology.

Evolution, in all intents and purposes, is NOT a religion, and just about has NOTHING to do with religion whatsoever.

The wierd thing about all of this is it only shows that those who use the argument that Evolution is a religion either must have great religious intolerance, or believe that any other religion or ideas that disagree from their own are either evil, bad, or should not be discussed because they are not the 'truth' that they themselves believe in.

I thought I'd point that out, and as for the topic at hand, I'd like to know from those of you who view evolution as a religion how you explain your intolerance to anything that disagrees with what you believe in. Secondly, I'd like to know how you could even think evolution is a religion. What evidence do you have for it? What can you cite to prove this?

For those of you who know the fact that evolution is not a religion and has nothing to do with religion, I'd like to know how you feel about people implying that evolution is a religion when it's not, and how you feel about how it shows signs of religious intolerance or a great lack of scientific understanding of the theory of Evolution.

Awesome post dude. You deserve some rep.

there are some people who tout that Evolution is based on pagan religions, and therefore evolutionists are pagans...it's sad really, how far these people have to bend backwards in order to not believe the truth.

__________________
"History is an illusion caused by the passage
of time, and time is an illusion caused by the passage of
history."

Or to stamp out those who believe differently; a time-honored religious custom.

__________________
To them, you're just a freak, like me! They need you right now, but when they don't, they'll cast you out, like a leper!
You see, their morals, their code, it's a bad joke. Dropped at the first sign of trouble. They're only as good as the world allows them to be. I'll show you. When the chips are down, these... these civilized people, they'll eat each other.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

See, I'm not a monster. I'm just ahead of the curve.

I define it this way: Religion is a positive belief (usually in supernatural elements) that is based on faith as opposed to evidence; which includes the performance of rituals, and which mandates particular behaviours of its adherants.

This is my definition. But you'll get something similar from probably any dictionary I'm sure. But no matter which one you cite, evolution still meets exactly none of anyone's criteria for a religious belief.

(G)god(s): Neither rejected nor required
Souls: unknown and irrelevent
Afterlife: Undeterminable
Devotions / obligations: user discretion
Moral lessons: Determined by societal standards
Rituals: None
Patron: None
Leaders: None
Holidays: None
Traditions: None
Place of worship: None
Practice of worship: None
Sacred teachings: Nothing is sacred
Dogma: None (really!)

Doctrine [something taught]: Yes, evolution has that. But what is usually, (and should always be) taught along with it is the scientific process, the practice of skeptical analysis and peer-review, a process of critical inquiry that is dependant upon demonstrable evidence which must be tested against a theory that is potentially falsifiable. This is the very opposite of faith, which is the core teaching of all actual religions. In fact, faith (in evolution or science in general) just might be the only thing which some might regard as a sin in that particular study.

What truth would that be OUT of the Goo, into the Zoo, then there was You. You go ahead and believe that if you like It takes an awful lot of faith to believe that mantra, so thats where evolution as a religion comes into play.

It may be imprecise to label evolution a religion. Secular Humanism is the religion -- evolution is a central tenet of Secular Humanism.



All too often, there is a slide from science to something more, and this slide goes unmentioned -- unrealized even.
For pointing this out we should be grateful for the opponents of evolution. ~ Michael Ruse

Almost no one is indifferent to Darwin, and no one should be. The Darwinian theory is a scientific theory, and a great one, but that is not all it is. The creationists who oppose it so bitterly are right about one thing: Darwin's dangerous idea cuts much deeper into the fabric of our most fundamental beliefs than many of its sophisticated apologists have yet admitted, even to themselves. ~ Daniel Dennett

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. ~ Michael Ruse

Universal acid is a liquid so corrosive that it will eat through anything! The problem is: what do you keep it in? It dissolves glass bottles and stainless-steel canisters as readily as paper bags. What would happen if you some how came upon or created a dollop of universal acid? Would the whole planet eventually be destroyed? What would it leave in its wake? After everything had been transformed by its encounter with universal acid, what would the world look like? Little did I realize that in a few years I would encounter an idea -- Darwin's idea -- bearing an unmistakable likeness to universal acid: it eats through just about every traditional concept, and leaves in its wake a revolutionized world-view, with most of the old landmarks still recognizable, but transformed in fundamental ways. ~ Daniel Dennett

Then, sometimes from the same person, you have evolution as secular religion, generally working from an explicitly materialist background and solving all of the world's major problems, from racism to education to conservation. Consider Edward O. Wilson, rightfully regarded as one of the most outstanding professional evolutionary biologists of our time, and the author of major works of straight science. In his On Human Nature, he calmly assures us that evolution is a myth that is now ready to take over Christianity. ~ Michael Ruse

The importance of the Scientific Revolution for philosophy is beyond question. Modern philosophy – the work of both rationalists and empiricists would have been impossible without great advances in physics. Analogously, therefore, we could anticipate that the Darwinian Revolution will have important implications for philosophy. Indeed, I would go further and say that we might expect Darwin's work to have even greater implications for philosophy than those of physics. The theory of evolution through natural selection impinges so directly on our own species. It is not just that we are on a speck of dust whirling around in the void but that we ourselves are no more than transformed apes. If such a realization is not to affect our views of epistemology and ethics, I do not know what is. As I said in the Preface, I find it inconceivable that it is irrelevant to the foundations of philosophy whether we are the end result of a slow natural evolutionary process, or made miraculously in God’s own image on a Friday, some 6,000 years ago. ~ Michael Ruse

Evolution destroyed the final foundations of traditional belief. To many people, it was evolution that would provide the foundations of a new belief-system. Evolution would lead to a deeper and truer understanding of the problems of knowledge. Evolution would lead to a deeper and true understanding of the nature of morality. Thus were born (what are known know as) 'evolutionary epistemology' and 'evolutionary ethics'. ~ Michael Ruse

It is probably because I do have an intensely religious nature – using this term in a secular sense, as one might apply it to other nonbelievers like Thomas Henry Huxley -- that I was attracted toward evolution. Speaking in an entirely secular manner, I do not believe that people come to evolution by chance. From Herbert Spencer (1892) to Edward O. Wilson (1978), it has functioned as a kind of Weltanschauung, a world picture which gives meaning to life. It is something that acts as a foundation for the big questions which we humans face. Yet, in those early years, this was not apparent to me -- at least, it was not a matter of great interest to me. ~ Michael Ruse

These new-style evolutionists--the mathematicians and empiricists--wanted to professionalize evolution because they wanted to study it full time in universities, with students and research grants, and so forth. However, like everyone else, they had been initially attracted to evolution precisely because of its quasi-religious aspects, regardless of whether these formed the basis of an agnostic/atheistic humanism or something to revitalize an old religion that had lost its spirit and vigor. Hence, they wanted to keep a value-impregnated evolutionism that delivered moral messages even as it strived for greater progressive triumphs. ~ Michael Ruse

Haeckel’s genius, with all its different facts, came out first when he wrote his theoretical magnum opus under the influence of the Origin of Species, which started him on his career as Darwin’s greatest apostle on the continent... I found Haeckel’s history of creation one day and read it with burning eyes and soul. It seemed that all problems of heaven and earth were solved simply and convincingly; there was an answer to every question which troubled the young mind. Evolution was the key to everything and could replace all the beliefs and creeds which one was discarding. There were no creation no God, no heaven and hell, only evolution and the wonderful law of recapitulation which demonstrated the fact of evolution to the most stubborn believer in creation. I was so fascinated and shaken up that I had to communicate to others my new knowledge, and this was done in the school yard, on school picnics, and among friends. I remember vividly a scene during a school picnic when I stood surrounded by a group of schoolboys to whom I expounded the gospel of Darwinism as Haeckel saw it. Another boy, who was already destined to become a parson like his father, passed and remarked, "He is again at converting." Indeed my zeal, which was Haeckel’s zeal, was that of a missionary. ~ Richard Goldschmidt

Hence, Huxley saw the need to found his own church, and evolution was the ideal cornerstone. It offered a story of origins, one that (thanks to progress) puts humans at the center and top and that could even provide moral messages. The philosopher Herbert Spencer was a great help here. He was ever ready to urge his fellow Victorians that the way to true virtue lies through progress, which comes from promoting a struggle in society as well as in biology--a laissez-faire socioeconomic philosophy. Thus, evolution had its commandments no less than did Christianity. And so Huxley preached evolution-as-world-view at working men's clubs, from the podia during presidential addresses, and in debates with clerics--notably Samuel Wilberforce, Bishop of Oxford. He even aided the founding of new cathedrals of evolution, stuffed with displays of dinosaurs newly discovered in the American West. Except, of course, these halls of worship were better known as natural history museums. ~ Michael Ruse

Whenever Darwinism is the topic, the temperature rises, because more is at stake than just the empirical facts about how life on Earth evolved, or the correct logic of the theory that accounts for those facts. One of the precious things that is at stake is a vision of what it means to ask, and answer, the question "Why?" Darwin's new perspective turns several traditional assumptions upside down, undermining our standard ideas about what ought to count as satisfying answers to this ancient and in inescapable question. Here science and philosophy get completely intertwined. Scientists sometimes deceive themselves into thinking that philosophical ideas are only, at best, decorations or parasitic commentaries on the hard, objective triumphs of science, and that they themselves are immune to the confusions that philosophers devote their lives to dissolving. But there is no such thing as philosophy-free science; there is only science whose philosophical baggage is taken on board without examination. ~ Daniel Dennett


Edit: attributed 7th Michael Ruse quote
re edited Goldschmidt quote.

__________________
If it is evolutionism, it is not science. If it is scence, it is not evolutionism.

How fortunate then that evolution has no mantra, let alone one as insipid as that.

__________________
To them, you're just a freak, like me! They need you right now, but when they don't, they'll cast you out, like a leper!
You see, their morals, their code, it's a bad joke. Dropped at the first sign of trouble. They're only as good as the world allows them to be. I'll show you. When the chips are down, these... these civilized people, they'll eat each other.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

See, I'm not a monster. I'm just ahead of the curve.

Bevets,

What's with the random drive-by quote mining?

It's random, it's a drive-by, and it's a quote mine.

Three strikes; bevets is out.
But at least he went down swinging.

__________________
To them, you're just a freak, like me! They need you right now, but when they don't, they'll cast you out, like a leper!
You see, their morals, their code, it's a bad joke. Dropped at the first sign of trouble. They're only as good as the world allows them to be. I'll show you. When the chips are down, these... these civilized people, they'll eat each other.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

See, I'm not a monster. I'm just ahead of the curve.