Posted on 01/28/2009 11:36:17 AM PST by Coyoteman
We will see and hear the term “Darwinism” a lot during 2009, a year during which scientists, teachers, and others who delight in the accomplishments of modern biology will commemorate the 200th anniversary of Darwin’s birth and the 150th anniversary of the publication of On the Origin of Species. But what does “Darwinism” mean? And how is it used? At best, the phrase is ambiguous and misleading about science. At worst, its use echoes a creationist strategy to demonize evolution.
snip...
In summary, then, “Darwinism” is an ambiguous term that impairs communication even about Darwin’s own ideas. It fails to convey the full panoply of modern evolutionary biology accurately, and it fosters the inaccurate perception that the field stagnated for 150 years after Darwin’s day. Moreover, creationists use “Darwinism” to frame evolutionary biology as an ism or ideology, and the public understanding of evolution and science suffers as a result. True, in science, we do not shape our research because of what creationists claim about our subject matter. But when we are in the classroom or otherwise dealing with the public understanding of science, it is entirely appropriate to consider whether what we say may be misunderstood. We cannot expect to change preconceptions if we are not willing to avoid exacerbating them. A first step is eschewing the careless use of “Darwinism.”
(Excerpt) Read more at springerlink.com ...
I gave you examples, ignorance and stupidity. Here is another one. When I married my wife I discriminated against a lot of other women and she discriminated against a lot of other men. I am very glad that she had very discriminating taste. Heck when I go shopping I am very discriminating, especially picking through the string beans. I doubt a day goes by that I am not constantly being intolerant of something or other and I am constantly discriminating (just deciding what to say, I had to discard gobs and gobs of options.)
It appears though that you would deny freedom except for those who believe as you do. If freedom comes from Christ then it would follow that only 'Christians' can be free. That is exactly the beliefs Moslems have and why the rest of us are dhimmi or infidels to them. They are people of the Book after all.
Actually ID vs Evolution is the poster child of false dichotomy.
You and your ilk simply love to compare Christianity and Islam don't you?
>>Eugenics and destruction of Christianity are core principles of Darwinism, do you reject these?<<
I would reject those... but I haven’t had to as Darwinism died out before I was born.
You can certainly call something else Darwinism if you want to but it mainly confuses the discussion.
'Probably"? : )
>>I’m not talking about evolutionary scientific theory, I’m talking about Darwinism. <<
I didn’t realize you recognized that distinction - sorry about that - its was I get for reading the thread backwards.
Changing the subject? Figures.
>>Uh-huh, and do you ever see teachers injecting their secularism into science class? politics? ideology?<<
I see all kinds of bad teaching including that one.
By far the largest problem in science I see is that schools favor education degrees plus people with good science degrees can make a lot more money elsewhere.
I believe that evolutionary theory is used to confuse the discussion.
Can you tell me why acceptance of evolution is so critical to some if it is not part of a greater agenda? Can you cite a single scientific advancement in the past 150 years that was predicated on the theory of evolution? People want to place Darwin on the same level as Newton, Galileo, Einstein, et al, but the fact remains that not only are his theories are not only unproven, they aren't even that significant from a scientific standpoint.
Yes, but it is like stealing candy from a baby, not very satisfying. The history and background similarities between Christians, Jews and Moslems is striking to everyone except them. They all believe in the God of Abraham and vociferously deny that the others believe in the same God. It would be funny if it wasn't so sad : (
That's spiritual freedom from the power and condemnation of sin, dummy, not political freedom. Sheesh, if you're not going to read the Bible, at least try reading some history about the founding of this country.
Face it, coyoteman's banning had nothing to do with "freedom". It had everything to do with the fact that he decided to fling his poo at the owner of this forum. Maybe you need to take a Constitution refresher course, but freedom of speech only applies to the government. No private citizen is under any obligation to give you (or coyoteman) "freedom of speech" on their own property. He who has the house, makes the rules.
What's sad is that you speak, yet know little about that which you speak of.
You would be hard-pressed to find a Christian or Jew who would not agree that Christians and Jews both accept Abraham as a Patriarch of monotheistic Judaism and Christianity.
With all the hyperbole flying around, I figured a little understatement might be in order.
No, just pointing to the correct usage of the term false dichotomy. It is very apt for the ID vs Evo debate which is a false dichotomy, but it is not applicable to the question of what your priorities are.
Actually, it's very apt, since your original question was a crude attempt to claim that either one believes in Christianity, or one believes in freedom, with the implied assumption that the two were necessarily mutually exclusive - which makes your question a false dichotomy, since you present only two options, and further present them in a falsely opposite way.
Ironically, the term "false dichotomy" doesn't apply to ID vs. evolution since, for two reasons:
One, there are, obviously, other options besides these two - Young Earth creationism, theistic evolution (which differs somewhat from ID), and so forth. This alone rather destroys the "di-" in dichotomy for you.
Two, as most proponents of ID will readily admit, the supposed differences between evolutionism and ID, on an operational level, are not really all that different. Where they differ is in their philosophical presuppositions. While obviously introducing a distinction between the two, the term "dichotomy", which suggests the false dilemma of "either-or" would not properly apply to them.
Have any other logical fallacies that you'd like to improperly apply?
Ignorance is bliss I suppose : ) I wasn't always an atheist.
Add Moslems to the mix and you would be more accurate. Do they all believe in the same God though? That is the more interesting question.
He told us in Hebrew and Greek. We just have to hope the translators of the KJV -- or any other translated version -- got it right. Sometimes they didn't.
Do Muslims believe they believe in the same God as Jews and Christians? Yes.
Do I believe that they believe in the same God? No.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.