What is "Evolutionism?"

[Split Rock]

Creationists here often use the term "evolutionism." I never use this term and I have only seen creationists use it. What is it?

 

[Strathos]

A word invented to provide a dichotomy with creationism, implying evolution is some kind of philosophy.

 

[OllieFranz]

A word invented to provide a dichotomy with creationism, implying evolution is some kind of philosophy.

More precisely, implying that it is some kind of religion.

 

[AV1611VET]

Creationists here often use the term "evolutionism." I never use this term and I have only seen creationists use it. What is it?

Do you question baptism, racism, electromagnetism, Calvinism, theism, or colloquialism as well?

 

[Notedstrangeperson]

Creationists here often use the term "evolutionism." I never use this term and I have only seen creationists use it. What is it?

Probably just a substitute for "Darwinism".

 

[Split Rock]

Do you question baptism, racism, electromagnetism, Calvinism, theism, or colloquialism as well?

I am not questioning anything (yet?). I am asking for a definition.

 

[AV1611VET]

I am not questioning anything (yet?). I am asking for a definition.

Evolutionism is a belief in evolution.

All you have to do is enter the word in the S.O.B. (Scientific Online Bible).

Here, I'll do it for you: evolutionism.

 

[Split Rock]

Evolutionism is a belief in evolution.

All you have to do is enter the word in the S.O.B. (Scientific Online Bible).

Here, I'll do it for you: evolutionism.

Thanks.

From the link:

"Evolutionism refers to the biological concept of evolution,[1] specifically to a widely held 19th century belief that organisms are intrinsically bound to increase in complexity.[2] The belief was extended to include cultural evolution and social evolution.[3] In the 1970s the term Neo-Evolutionism was used to describe the idea "that human beings sought to preserve a familiar style of life unless change was forced on them by factors that were beyond their control".[4]

The term is sometimes also colloquially used to refer to acceptance of the modern evolutionary synthesis, a scientific theory that describes how biological evolution occurs. In addition, the term is used in a broader sense to cover a world-view on a wide variety of topics, including chemical evolution as an alternative term for abiogenesis or for nucleosynthesis of chemical elements, galaxy formation and evolution, stellar evolution, spiritual evolution, technological evolution and universal evolution, which seeks to explain every aspect of the world in which we live.[5][6]

Since the overwhelming majority of scientists accept the modern evolutionary synthesis as the best explanation of current data,[7] the term is seldom used in the scientific community; to say someone is a scientist implies acceptance of evolutionary views,[8] unless specifically noted otherwise. In the creation-evolution controversy, creationists often call those who accept the validity of the modern evolutionary synthesis "evolutionists" and the theory itself as "evolutionism." Some creationists and creationist organizations, such as the Institute of Creation Research, use these terms in an effort to make it appear that evolutionary biology is a form of secular religion."​

So, there seems to be more than one definition of the term, from the link you posted. If you yourself use the term (if you do, I don't recall that you use it much) under the definition of : "acceptance of the modern evolutionary synthesis" that is fine. I am wondering if others here use one of the other definitions, or one not mentioned in the link.

 

[CabVet]

Evolutionism is a belief in evolution.

All you have to do is enter the word in the S.O.B. (Scientific Online Bible).

Here, I'll do it for you: evolutionism.

Wrong. Evolution requires no belief.

 

[verysincere]

Wrong. Evolution requires no belief.

Correct. But "evolutionism" is a term referring to the creationist misunderstanding of evolution. Indeed, some of those who use the term also claim that evolution is a "religion" ---even though they also claim that "evolutionists" are deluded by naturalism. But evolution cannot be BOTH a reverence for the transcendent (the definition of religion) and something which IGNORES the transcendent and focuses solely on the natural! (Creationists should pick one accusation or the other!)

 

[AV1611VET]

Correct. But "evolutionism" is a term referring to the creationist misunderstanding of evolution. Indeed, some of those who use the term also claim that evolution is a "religion" ---even though they also claim that "evolutionists" are deluded by naturalism. But evolution cannot be BOTH a reverence for the transcendent (the definition of religion) and something which IGNORES the transcendent and focuses solely on the natural! (Creationists should pick one accusation or the other!)

In my opinion, the end times will consist of Scientism vs. Christianity.

 

[Strathos]

Wrong. Evolution requires no belief.

That depends on how you define "belief". You're probably thinking of it as the same thing as faith, even though it's not necessarily the same.

Some people call faith "belief without evidence", but that would imply that there is such a thing as "belief with evidence", wouldn't it?

 

[CabVet]

In my opinion, the end times will consist of Scientism vs. Christianity.

Your opinion is wrong.

 

[verysincere]

Your opinion is wrong.

It is also silly. And it is a view not to be found anywhere in the Bible. (Surprise! Yet again there is confusion between the Bible and what tradition THINKS it finds in the Bible.)

 

[CabVet]

That depends on how you define "belief".

Yes, it certainly does, and all creationists I have met so far define "belief" as accepting something without evidence. That is why I use "acceptance" instead of "belief" when I accept something based on evidence.

For example, I accept evolution because I understand both the theory and its evidence very well. However, I chose to believe in the Big Bang. There are many things I don't understand about it, but I believe the scientists that developed this theory know what they are doing.

 

[verysincere]

And directly related to that, have improvements in Bible translation helped expose the flaws in young earth creationism (in showing that it has weak support within the Biblical text itself?)

 

[AV1611VET]

Your opinion is wrong.

I opine that Jesus resurrected from the dead ... is that wrong too? or are you just being contrary for contrary's sake?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I opine that Jesus resurrected from the dead ... is that wrong too? or are you just being contrary for contrary's sake?

The evidence against that claim is quite strong. The evidence for it is quite weak. What do you believe?

 

[CabVet]

I opine that Jesus resurrected from the dead ... is that wrong too? or are you just being contrary for contrary's sake?

That is not your opinion, that is what the Bible says. BIG difference.

 

[Adaephon]

I opine that Jesus resurrected from the dead ... is that wrong too? or are you just being contrary for contrary's sake?

AV, no one cares.