Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: rface
The Evo-Evangelists don't seem to be convincing very many.

People have a hard time accepting that their existence is just the result of a very big accident. It is impossible to build any rational society or morality on a foundation of meaninglessness. If you don't believe me, look at the melt-down in Europe, home of The Absurd.

129 posted on 03/08/2006 7:30:59 PM PST by cookcounty (Army Vet, Army Dad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: cookcounty
The Evo-Evangelists don't seem to be convincing very many.

We're not "evangelists", although I suppose it might look that way to someone who himself sees everything through the prism of religion.

And 43% is quite a respectable amount of support for a complex technical topic like this one. Heck, it's a higher level of support than the percentage of Born Again Christians who are willing to register as Republicans, it's higher support than the percent of Americans who think the Iraq war was the right thing to do, and it's higher than the percentage who think the Iraq war is going well, and it's higher than the percentage of people who agree that Islam encourages violence. Complex issues often have trouble achieving an overwhelming percentage of support, no matter how true they are, because it's hard to put all the relevant facts before the entire public such that everyone is acquainted with all the pertinent information, and because conflicting premises and beliefs will undercut acceptance of any issue that touches on some people's hotbuttons.

People have a hard time accepting that their existence is just the result of a very big accident.

You really need to learn some evolutionary biology before you attempt to critique it -- describing it as "a very big accident" is really inappropriate and inaccurate.

It is impossible to build any rational society or morality on a foundation of meaninglessness.

I agree, but you're entirely mistaken if you think that understanding and realizing the validity of evolutionary biology requires in any way the acceptance of "meaninglessness".

Even purely naturalistic origins are entirely consistent with the statement, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

141 posted on 03/08/2006 8:34:25 PM PST by Ichneumon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies ]

To: cookcounty
People have a hard time accepting that their existence is just the result of a very big accident.

Having a "hard time" accepting a concept is not evidence against a concept. However, as evolution does not claim that existence is "just the result of a very big accident", I do not see the relevance of your statement to the discussion in the first place.

It is impossible to build any rational society or morality on a foundation of meaninglessness.

In addition to appealing to the logical fallacy of argument from the consequences, there is no relevance of this statement to the theory of evolution.
148 posted on 03/08/2006 9:41:45 PM PST by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson