Views of Evolution Depend on Knowledge

[pitabread]

The knowledge of God is far more valuable to mankind than the ToE.

Based on what criteria?

 

[bhsmte]

Great opportunity, thanks. The more people study evolution the less they tend to study the bible. The knowledge of God is far more valuable to mankind than the ToE.

What God? What knowledge?

 

[Brightmoon]

I do not value human knowledge. It is good, but has low value.

So , George Orwell had it absolutely correct in your case,

“Ignorance is Strength”

 

[juvenissun]

So , George Orwell had it absolutely correct in your case,

“Ignorance is Strength”

What he said doesn't matter. It is just a piece of human knowledge.

 

[juvenissun]

So , George Orwell had it absolutely correct in your case,

“Ignorance is Strength”

By the way, you did, and many people made the same mistake (due to ignorance. note: not due to the lack of knowledge): The antonym of knowledge is not ignorance, but is faith.

 

[pitabread]

The antonym of knowledge is not ignorance, but is faith.

Thesaurus results for KNOWLEDGE

Antonyms of knowledge
ignorance, illiteracy, illiterateness​

 

[OldWiseGuy]

So, we are agreed then - the average person is a lazy, unambitious, superstitious, irresponsible fool. I knew we would eventually find common ground.

Have you seen the pile of evolution stuff that needs to be studied?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Based on what criteria?

Based on mankind's most pressing problems.

 

[pitabread]

Based on mankind's most pressing problems.

This is just a vague non-answer.

You said this, "The knowledge of God is far more valuable to mankind than the ToE."

Give a specific, demonstrable, measurable criteria by which you can evaluate this statement. Otherwise such a statement is little better than your average bumper-sticker wisdom.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

This is just a vague non-answer.

You said this, "The knowledge of God is far more valuable to mankind than the ToE."

Give a specific, demonstrable, measurable criteria by which you can evaluate this statement. Otherwise such a statement is little better than your average bumper-sticker wisdom.

Man's nature is the primary cause of mankind's problems.
The bible deals with this nature. Science does not. Pick any major problem and give it this test;

Is it caused by lack of scientific knowledge (particularly the ToE)?

Or is it because man is inherently evil?

Repentance can remove the evil and thus the problems. Science cannot accomplish this.

What science has done however is to devise ways to profit by means of these problems. So much so that global economies are now dependent upon the evil deeds of mankind and the problems they cause. And sadly we reached the point of no return long ago. We are now thoroughly addicted to evil, and to science.

 

[theQuincunx5]

What science has done however is to devise ways to profit by means of these problems.

Do you really see no good coming from science in general?

 

[pitabread]

Man's nature is the primary cause of mankind's problems.
The bible deals with this nature. Science does not. Pick any major problem and give it this test;

Is it caused by lack of scientific knowledge (particularly the ToE)?

Or is it because man is inherently evil?

Repentance can remove the evil and thus the problems. Science cannot accomplish this.

There are a few inherent problems with the above:

1) Assuming that man is "inherently evil" to begin with. That's a loaded statement and one which I think you'd have a hard time demonstrating.

2) The belief that all one has to do is adopt a religious faith and everything becomes hunky-dory. Except for the slight problem that plenty of people professing religious faith have also done Very Bad Things, if history is anything to go by.

3) The belief that it is a specifically religious faith (and a particular one at that) is necessarily what is required to get a person to not do Very Bad Things. Yet statistics on various social or anti-social behaviors don't necessarily bear this out. I have no doubt that in certain circumstances, religious faith may help out individuals, but it's not necessarily the cure-all for everything wrong with the world.

I'm afraid you're not likely to find much empirical support for your contentions here. It's more wishful and rather myopic thinking to believe that all of humanity's issues can be solved just by adopting a particular ideology. If anything that type of thinking is responsible for a lot of the conflict we see in society.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Do you really see no good coming from science in general?

Of course, but the subject is scientific knowledge vs the knowledge of God as revealed by the Holy Spirit.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

There are a few inherent problems with the above:

1) Assuming that man is "inherently evil" to begin with. That's a loaded statement and one which I think you'd have a hard time demonstrating.

2) The belief that all one has to do is adopt a religious faith and everything becomes hunky-dory. Except for the slight problem that plenty of people professing religious faith have also done Very Bad Things, if history is anything to go by.

3) The belief that it is a specifically religious faith (and a particular one at that) is necessarily what is required to get a person to not do Very Bad Things. Yet statistics on various social or anti-social behaviors don't necessarily bear this out. I have no doubt that in certain circumstances, religious faith may help out individuals, but it's not necessarily the cure-all for everything wrong with the world.

I'm afraid you're not likely to find much empirical support for your contentions here. It's more wishful and rather myopic thinking to believe that all of humanity's issues can be solved just by adopting a particular ideology. If anything that type of thinking is responsible for a lot of the conflict we see in society.

The practice of Christianity will solve more problems than the practice of science. This should be obvious. But as I pointed out, it's too late. Even the best efforts of Christians won't be enough to save us in the end.

 

[Brightmoon]

By the way, you did, and many people made the same mistake (due to ignorance. note: not due to the lack of knowledge): The antonym of knowledge is not ignorance, but is faith.

Sorry I’m not looking forward to being an ignoramus and pretending that this is faith. Enjoy that particular state by your lonesome

 

[DogmaHunter]

I do not value human knowledge. It is good, but has low value.

yeah, I figured

Care to try and answer my question? Because you seem to be doing your best to dance around….


Here it is again:
Consider the statements "I value knowledge" versus "I worship knowledge".

What is the practical difference?

 

[DogmaHunter]

Great opportunity, thanks. The more people study evolution the less they tend to study the bible. The knowledge of God is far more valuable to mankind than the ToE.

Not when the point is to understand biological phenomena, off course.
You won't learn about how DNA works from the bible.

Forget about biology for a second.
Suppose you want to build a space probe that needs to get into orbit around Mars.
What's your best way to accomplish this?
Studying physics and engineering? or studying the bible?

Will studying the bible give you ANY practical or theoretical help in building that space probe? Will it make any kind of a difference, to build that space probe?

 

[DogmaHunter]

I'll give you that if you give me my quotes (semi quotes) around 'wings' and 'flying'.

I would, if you would have actually used quotes around those words. But you didn't.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Pile all the papers and books on evolution in front of the average person (that are necessary for understanding the theory) and he will look at you like you're crazy.

Actually, contrary to what you seem to think, in my experience the "average person", already has a working knowledge of evolution theory since the average person was taught those things in high school.

Creationists are a minority, you know?

Science asks the average person to study all this stuff or just take their word that it's true.

I had working knowledge on evolution by the 4th grade in high school. I was 16 at the time.

And also, at no point does science expect anyone to "just believe". That, in fact, would be contrary to just about every scientific principle. You seem to be confusing it with religious beliefs that need to be "just believed".

The bible on the other hand can be easily understood by most in a relatively short time (also available in many languages).

lol

Is that why there are thousands of denominations?
Curiously, there aren't thousands of "interpretations" of basic biology.

Go figure

 

[DogmaHunter]

Emu's are flightless birds, but perfectly designed as a ground dwelling specie. That they 'flap' their stubby wings while running indicate their possible function as a 'balancer'.

If their wings are vestigial we should be able to track it in the fossil record.

It sounds like you find it surprising that organisms live in habitats in which they can thrive.