• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
  • We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

Is Universal Evolution Woo-Woo?

Landon Caeli

Average Human
Site Supporter
Jan 8, 2016
18,380
6,968
48
North Bay
✟864,044.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others

Gregory Thompson

Change is inevitable, feel free to spare some.
Site Supporter
Dec 20, 2009
30,532
8,672
Canada
✟924,638.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Has anyone here ever heard of, or considered the plausibility of Universal Evolution?

Universal evolution is a theory of evolution formulated by Pierre Teilhard de Chardin and Julian Huxley that describes the gradual development of the Universe from subatomic particles to human society, considered by Teilhard as the last stage.
Universal evolution - Wikipedia

...Or is it "woo"..?
From the basis of science that being observation, we seem to be going backwards in terms of evolution.

Since everything is subject to decay, the process of evolution is also.
 
Upvote 0

ReesePiece23

The Peanut Buttery Member.
Sep 17, 2013
5,844
5,320
35
✟331,886.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
It's a nice idea, because I've barely even made a dent in my understanding of quantum physics. But I won't set my watch to this theory just yet.

Personally, I like to view biology and physics as two separate entities. I'm with Tanj in that without gene variants you can't have biological evolution. That said, everything can be traced back to the stars one way or another; and if we can ever find real evidence of 'pop 3' stars, then I suppose that could be a feather in the cap for the theory.

But basically, I don't know.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,435
52,724
Guam
✟5,182,747.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Has anyone here ever heard of, or considered the plausibility of Universal Evolution?
The term for it is: cosmic evolution.

wjg8fuFH2OAoDogJ_7rGveAaAFEemTX85UGOuwKpInycZBAqKyOkOZDA13wKHl2uJepz-RdgOJ9R1HEwwgWGlbyQfEDRvtIORUBxe0naG0BdbZ6sELz3


Simply defined, cosmic evolution is the study of change--the vast number of developmental and generative changes that have accumulated during all time and across all space, from big bang to humankind.

SOURCE

Of course, some of those who don't like that term will inject "change in alleles over time", so they can just claim evolution is only a biological process.

My guess is because they would have to admit that abiogenesis falls under "chemical evolution," and claiming abiogenesis is evolution is anathema to them.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Landon Caeli
Upvote 0

dlamberth

Senior Contributor
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2003
20,213
3,201
Oregon
✟992,655.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Politics
US-Others
Has anyone here ever heard of, or considered the plausibility of Universal Evolution?

Universal evolution is a theory of evolution formulated by Pierre Teilhard de Chardin and Julian Huxley that describes the gradual development of the Universe from subatomic particles to human society, considered by Teilhard as the last stage.
Universal evolution - Wikipedia

...Or is it "woo"..?
I'm a huge fan of Teilhard de Chardin. His thoughts on the evolving cosmos and consciousness towards what he called "Omega Point" are right in line with the esoteric aspects of many other spiritual trajectories. Teilhard saw Christ IN the essence of everything that exist. It's a Cosmic Christ perspective. God was a reality, even in matter around us for Chardin.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Landon Caeli
Upvote 0
Jul 12, 2010
469
647
United Kingdom
✟306,575.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
I vote woo. In biological terms, evolution is the change in allele frequency over time. Nothing not alive has alleles.

Biological evolution is, as you say, the change in allele frequencies, within populations (don't forget that bit), over time.

But evolution in the more general sense is simply change over time. So, in that sense, the Universe is evolving. It started as, more or less, uniformly distributed particles that possessed gravitational potential, which led to the collapse of clouds of particles into stars, which produced different forms of energy through fusion, which drove chemical processes that, eventually, gave rise to life and biological evolution and then cultural evolution.

So there is a form of universal evolution. But to suggest that humans are the end point displays a severe lack of imagination, at best, and woo, at worst.

It's a nice idea, because I've barely even made a dent in my understanding of quantum physics. But I won't set my watch to this theory just yet.

Personally, I like to view biology and physics as two separate entities. I'm with Tanj in that without gene variants you can't have biological evolution. That said, everything can be traced back to the stars one way or another; and if we can ever find real evidence of 'pop 3' stars, then I suppose that could be a feather in the cap for the theory.

But basically, I don't know.

They really aren't. For example, the energy that drives our bodies is derived from different concentrations of protons within our cells - fundamentally, it's electromagnetism that drives biological processes.

Biolgical systems also make use of a quantum mechanical effect called tunnelling. Basically, because particles can exist anywhere within a cloud of possible locations, sometimes two particles will exist within each other's energy barrier (a barrier at which they would normally be repulsed electromagnetically) without the energy that would normally be required to overcome the barrier. They then react, forming a new molecule. That isn't an uncommon effect either, it happens a lot.
 
Upvote 0

FrumiousBandersnatch

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2009
15,407
8,144
✟358,196.00
Faith
Atheist
I think it's reasonable to describe biological evolution as a part or subsystem of cosmic evolution - they're driven by the same process. But it's important to note that it's entropic rather than teleological - there's no higher goal or progress, beyond the increase of entropy until thermodynamic equilibrium ('heat death'). The evolution of complex systems is a temporary feature of the current benign entropic gradient; the early universe was too chaotic, the later universe will be too equilibrated.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0
Sep 8, 2012
385
211
✟14,978.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Atheists dislike the theory of the big bang and the concept of the universe having a beginning. A starting point which might be correlated to a God or Creator.

Being aware of and acknowledging this negative bias on the part of secularists, is mandatory for recognizing the various political agendas behind many concepts being deterred or encouraged in cosmology.

Left wing ideology encompasses ideas like multiverses. Accretion theory and the idea of the universe simply accumulating over time(universal evolution), likewise is left wing ideology.
 
Upvote 0

FrumiousBandersnatch

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2009
15,407
8,144
✟358,196.00
Faith
Atheist
Atheists dislike the theory of the big bang and the concept of the universe having a beginning. A starting point which might be correlated to a God or Creator.
This is a common error. I suppose it's understandable that those for whom belief in God is central in their lives tend to project that concern onto others, but the vast majority of atheists no more consider avoiding God as an explanation for things than believers invoke God to avoid gremlins, pixies, or magic; i.e. they simply don't consider it.

Left wing ideology encompasses ideas like multiverses. Accretion theory and the idea of the universe simply accumulating over time(universal evolution), likewise is left wing ideology.
Can you explain how these physical hypotheses are left-wing ideology? AFAICS, it's possible that left-wingers are more likely to entertain such ideas, but that doesn't make them left-wing ideology.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0

Shemjaza

Regular Member
Site Supporter
Apr 17, 2006
6,487
4,016
47
✟1,173,957.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
AU-Greens
Atheists dislike the theory of the big bang and the concept of the universe having a beginning. A starting point which might be correlated to a God or Creator.

I'm pretty sure that a considerably higher percentage of atheists support the Big Bang theory than theists.

In addition the Big Bang doesn't even explain the origin of the energy and matter found in the early universe. I merely describes the development and changes that occurred as far back as we can find evidence.

Being aware of and acknowledging this negative bias on the part of secularists, is mandatory for recognizing the various political agendas behind many concepts being deterred or encouraged in cosmology.

Or it's possible that your own bias is leading your to imagine bizarre motivations and conspiracies connecting religious beliefs, economic preferences and scientific hypothesis.

Left wing ideology encompasses ideas like multiverses. Accretion theory and the idea of the universe simply accumulating over time(universal evolution), likewise is left wing ideology.

I think you are using a very non-standard definition of "left wing".
 
Upvote 0

Ophiolite

Recalcitrant Procrastinating Ape
Nov 12, 2008
9,504
10,373
✟302,925.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
Has anyone here ever heard of, or considered the plausibility of Universal Evolution?

Universal evolution is a theory of evolution formulated by Pierre Teilhard de Chardin and Julian Huxley that describes the gradual development of the Universe from subatomic particles to human society, considered by Teilhard as the last stage.
Universal evolution - Wikipedia

...Or is it "woo"..?
Gosh, that takes me back. (Not in an evolutionary sense.) I read some of de Chardin's work fifty years ago and was greatly impressed by it. (I was easily impressed in those days.)

As a general description of what has actually occurred one cannot really fault it. The difficulty for many seems to be that the descriptive elements are tied to an explicit teleology. That doesn't sit well in the framework of methodological naturalism that underpins current scientific investigation. I suspect this distaste for teleology on the part of current scientists might turn out to be a mistake, but that is another story.

So I see it as a poetic perspective on the history of the universe, rather than woo. (Of course, if @1rreducibly Complex is correct it may just be a right wing plot. :))
 
  • Like
Reactions: Landon Caeli
Upvote 0

dlamberth

Senior Contributor
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2003
20,213
3,201
Oregon
✟992,655.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Politics
US-Others
I think the way that Teilhard de Charden has changed my perspective in regard to the evolutionary process is that it's "conscientiousness" that's evolving and becoming more complex over time. When I began to look at evolution in that way, it has had a way of changing the whole landscape and depth of nature and the cosmos.
 
Upvote 0

durangodawood

re Member
Aug 28, 2007
28,653
20,280
Colorado
✟567,616.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Single
Upvote 0

durangodawood

re Member
Aug 28, 2007
28,653
20,280
Colorado
✟567,616.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Single
... I suspect this distaste for teleology on the part of current scientists might turn out to be a mistake, but that is another story....
Whats a possible candidate for a teleology underlying the evolution of the universe? i.e. what/who holds the purpose? and what is the purpose?
 
Upvote 0

Ophiolite

Recalcitrant Procrastinating Ape
Nov 12, 2008
9,504
10,373
✟302,925.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
Whats a possible candidate for a teleology underlying the evolution of the universe? i.e. what/who holds the purpose? and what is the purpose?
I have absolutely no idea. I simply note that one is much more likley to catch trout if one goes fishing for them. By excluding the possibility of teleological explanations for observations, across the board, we make it very unlikely we might stumble across such evidence, in the unlikely event it exists. I merely think it would be useful to, occassionally, review the possibility.
 
Upvote 0

durangodawood

re Member
Aug 28, 2007
28,653
20,280
Colorado
✟567,616.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Single
I have absolutely no idea. I simply note that one is much more likley to catch trout if one goes fishing for them. By excluding the possibility of teleological explanations for observations, across the board, we make it very unlikely we might stumble across such evidence, in the unlikely event it exists. I merely think it would be useful to, occassionally, review the possibility.
Aw darn. I was hoping for something exciting and crazy. But generally I agree.
 
Upvote 0