Do creationist beliefs encourage anti-intellectualism?

[pitabread]

For the purpose of the poll, I'm defining creationists to be anyone that rejects evolutionary biology for the diversification of species in favor of some form of creation. Non-creationists are those who accept evolutionary biology for the diversification of species. Whether one is a theist or not is irrelevant in the latter context.

Now regarding the topic, based on my experience interacting with creationists and reading creationist literature, I view creationist beliefs as encouraging anti-intellectualism. This includes suppression of uncomfortable knowledge (I've seen the occasional creationist claim they want to ban the subject of evolutionary biology), and the avoidance of investigation into things which may contradict creationist beliefs.

Historically there have been government led initiatives to suppress scientific teaching contradicting creationist beliefs. This includes laws in the United States suppressing the teaching of evolution, as well as similar laws and initiatives in other countries.

Thoughts?

 

[AV1611VET]

Thoughts?

Good poll.

I voted: I'm a creationist and I think creationist beliefs do NOT encourage anti-intellectualism.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Historically there have been government led initiatives to suppress scientific material contradicting creationist beliefs. This includes laws in the United States suppressing the teaching of evolution, as well as similar laws and initiatives in other countries.

How many years has it been now, that Creationism is suppressed (to put it mildly) in the classroom?

 

[GallagherM]

What is the actual definition of a creationist, pitabread? I’ve lived under a rock most of my life, in consideration of hermit crab culture.

 

[pitabread]

How many years has it been now, that Creationism is suppressed (to put it mildly) in the classroom?

Creationism hasn't been suppressed from the classroom. In an appropriate subject (e.g. comparative religions) it would be appropriate to teach about creationist beliefs.

What has been suppressed is attempts promote creationist beliefs in public schools in violation of the U.S. constitution (government endorsement of religious beliefs).

 

[pitabread]

What is the actual definition of a creationist, pitabread? I’ve lived under a rock most of my life, in consideration of hermit crab culture.

I defined creationist for the purpose of the poll in the first paragraph of the opening post.

 

[GallagherM]

But is that the real definition which is what is being sought after will you help me ?

 

[pitabread]

But is that the real definition which is what is being sought after will you help me ?

There is no singular, universal definition of "creationist". I defined in the opening thread for the purpose of the poll. Nothing more.

 

[Sidon]

Now regarding the topic, based on my experience interacting with creationists and reading creationist literature, I view creationist beliefs as encouraging anti-intellectualism.

Trying to prove that "intellectualism" should be based on agreeing with "the theory of Evolution", is of itself, anti-intellectualism, as its the essence of dumb to not be able to recognize that there is always the other side of the argument, the flip side of the coin, the alternative position, that has its own merit and establishes its validity.
In all cases, the argument for, and against, establishes the argument as valid, and from there you pick your side.

For example, In a Court of Law, a murderer has a lawyer, and the lawyer is appointed, and the lawyer knows the guy did it.
But, he presents his case, as if the guy is innocent..... and the case it valid, the argument is Legit...... while at the same time being moot.
Its a false argument, based on deceit, yet, its valid in a court of law.

Let me give you an intellectual question to ask a evolutionary biologist, to find out if they have any common sense as well as an IQ, or if they are just pretending to possess both.

Ask them......"Why can't you prove that God does not exist"?

See, this can't be proven, it can only be argued.

This is the perfect test to discover the depth of their intellect, as well as their honesty....especially their honestly.

 

[GallagherM]

Definition of CREATIONISM found this if interested. Thank you though anyway brother.

 

[pitabread]

Trying to prove that "intellectualism" should be based on agreeing with "the theory of Evolution"

That's not suggested in the OP. One can learn about an idea (and encourage learning about different ideas) without having to necessarily agree with it.

as its the essence of dumb to not be able to recognize that there is always the other side of the argument, the flip side of the coin, the alternative position, that has its own merit and establishes its validity.

This implies the alternatives have merits or validity. Just because one has a contradictory view, there is no necessitation of merit associated with it.

Whether ideas are valid or have merit is something that must be established on their own.

Ask them......"Why can't you prove that God does not exist"?

See, this can't be proven, it can only be argued.

This is the perfect test to discover the depth of their intellect, as well as their honesty....especially their honestly.

This isn't about whether or not God exists. This is not an issue of atheism versus theism.

In fact, I even mentioned this directly in the OP. That you are immediately jumping to the subject of the existence of God suggests not understanding the thread topic as outlined in the OP.

 

[AV1611VET]

What is the actual definition of a creationist, pitabread? I’ve lived under a rock most of my life, in consideration of hermit crab culture.

There's a working definition, for the purposes of this thread, given in the OP.

 

[GallagherM]

Opinion based isn’t necessarily a definition would it be @AV1611VET ?

 

[Occams Barber]

For the purpose of the poll, I'm defining creationists to be anyone that rejects evolutionary biology for the diversification of species in favor of some form of creation. Non-creationists are those who accept evolutionary biology for the diversification of species. Whether one is a theist or not is irrelevant in the latter context.

Now regarding the topic, based on my experience interacting with creationists and reading creationist literature, I view creationist beliefs as encouraging anti-intellectualism. This includes suppression of uncomfortable knowledge (I've seen the occasional creationist claim they want to ban the subject of evolutionary biology), and the avoidance of investigation into things which may contradict creationist beliefs.

Historically there have been government led initiatives to suppress scientific material contradicting creationist beliefs. This includes laws in the United States suppressing the teaching of evolution, as well as similar laws and initiatives in other countries.

Thoughts?

It would be interesting to see a survey looking at the degree of overlap between creationism and other anti-science/conspiratorial beliefs like:

• Climate change denial
• Covid virus conspiracies
• Covid vaccine conspiracies
• The Trump election conspiracy
• The Great Reset conspiracy/globalism
• The Critical Race Theory conspiracy
• The 4G conspiracy (is that still a thing?)
• The Great Gay conspiracy (to convert us all to gay)

I'm sure there are more.

OB

 

[pitabread]

It would be interesting to see a survey looking at the degree of overlap between creationism and other anti-science/conspiratorial beliefs like:

• Climate change denial
• Covid virus conspiracies
• Covid vaccine conspiracies
• The Trump election conspiracy
• The Great Reset conspiracy/globalism
• The Critical Race Theory conspiracy
• The 4G conspiracy (is that still a thing?)
• The Great Gay conspiracy (to convert us all to gay)

I'm sure there are more.

OB

Anecdotally, I did notice that the among the COVID-19 deniers on this forum were a number of creationists that had previously been posting in this C/E forum.

 

[AV1611VET]

Opinion based isn’t necessarily a definition would it be @AV1611VET ?

No, but it facilitates the discussion and, in this case, the voting process by not having to be so technical.

That's why I called it a "working definition," which in some cases, can indeed be different from a technical definition.

In short, Occam's razor and all.

 

[GallagherM]

Okay, thank you guys for the help. You all have a good rest of your evenings.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

Non-creationists are those who accept evolutionary biology for the diversification of species.

Diversification within a species or creation of completely new species?

Historically there have been government led initiatives to suppress scientific material contradicting creationist beliefs.

Examples? Because the only initiatives I see regarding the topic are those seeking to suppress creationist beliefs.

 

[AV1611VET]

Pita, I take it you don't want to display the votes publicly?

 

[AV1611VET]

Okay, thank you guys for the help. You all have a good rest of your evenings.

You too, sir. God bless!