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

Skip to comments.

Evolution, Creationism, and Intelligent Design (A Libertarian Agnostic's View)
Darwiniana ^ | May 6, 2008 | Charley Reese

Posted on 05/07/2008 5:09:16 PM PDT by SeekAndFind

I am an agnostic when it comes to explaining the origin of life. I don’t believe yet in evolution, creationism or intelligent design. I can see flaws in all three. I just simply don’t know and frankly don’t think it matters whether we know or not.

My main conflict with the evolutionists is that they wish to assert their theory as fact and to employ government power to ban discussion of creationism and intelligent design on the grounds that they are unscientific or, worse from their point of view, religious. I am against banning any idea, theory, speculation or body of guesses. Human history shows us to be far too error-prone to go around eliminating dissent by majority vote of one of the more ignorant classes in our society, namely politicians.

Science has been itching to replace religion in Western culture for some time. You can see for yourself how science assumes the characteristics of religion. There is the priesthood (scientists, or at least those who call themselves scientists) and laity, which is the rest of us. Theory becomes dogma. Dissenters are persecuted. The high priests of science want the government not only to fund them, but to enforce their dogmas with the power of the law.

I believe in the separation of church and state. I also believe in the separation of science and state. In fact, I believe in the separation of practically all aspects of life from the state, which should basically tote the mail and guard the coast.

We, as mortals with short life spans, would not even be concerned about the origins of life, except the evolutionists wish to use their theory to destroy religion, and religious people want to use their theory to defend religion.

True science means simply the search for truth, but a search conducted with an open mind and tolerance for dissent. There is nothing wrong with a person believing that a dinosaur evolved into a canary, but there is also nothing wrong with someone believing that God created the first man and woman. I’ve never seen any physical evidence to support either belief, and one is no more improbable than the other. The only fact is that some beliefs have to be accepted on the basis of faith, and that goes for evolution as well as creationism.

The trouble is that both science and religion provide a person with a worldview, and unconsciously the person begins to evaluate everything he or she sees or hears or thinks up in accordance with the worldview. I see no reason to include any discussion of evolution or creationism in secondary schools. There is a large volume of facts biology students need to learn without wasting their time on theories that have no practical value. It’s like teaching molecular physics to students studying auto mechanics.

There is always more to learn than there is time to learn it, so we should be more practical in designing our school curricula. Not every student needs to read Shakespeare or learn calculus. I’ve had no occasion to solve a quadratic equation since I left high school. Students should be taught only what will be useful to them. Survey courses – giving them a taste of what is on the large menu of learning – are useful. Practical courses, such as personal finance or typing, are useful. Teaching all children a second language would be extremely useful, as would be music and drawing.

We should try to keep ideological and political disputes out of the public schools. We have to recognize that fanatics and ideologues will try to inject their materials into the public schools, and we should guard against that. I truly despise people who try to use children in adult conflicts. We should also guard against the state imposing its views on the students. The best way to do that is to abolish public education, a great idea whose time I hope will come one day.

In the meantime, just remember that facts are scarcer than theories, speculation, assumptions and guesses.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; News/Current Events; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: creationism; evolution; intelligentdesign; sockpuppetalert
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-162 next last

1 posted on 05/07/2008 5:09:16 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

“My main conflict with the evolutionists is that they wish to assert their theory as fact”

Correct. The TOE is not a fact.


2 posted on 05/07/2008 5:14:12 PM PDT by webstersII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: webstersII

As a creationist, I appreciate some logic from an agnostic. It drives me nuts that those who support the theory of evolution usually won’t let any alternate theories be taught. They usually want the only microphone.


3 posted on 05/07/2008 5:19:53 PM PDT by Marie2 (I used to be disgusted. . .now I try to be amused.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

“The best way to do that is to abolish public education,”

Agreed - and for all the ID’s out there, isnt it enough that God made the something from nothingness?

If God made everything so intelligent for millions of years, how come man did not get smart until Christ?

Why are the great discoveries not until the time of Christ and later?


4 posted on 05/07/2008 5:27:00 PM PDT by spanalot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Marie2

“It drives me nuts that those who support the theory of evolution usually won’t let any alternate theories be taught.”

“Theory” implies there’s supporting evidence.

Young Earth creationism is faith, not science.


5 posted on 05/07/2008 5:38:23 PM PDT by hepatoma
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

“We should try to keep ideological and political disputes out of the public schools.”

Unfortunately, I think that with public schools, you cannot keep the ideological and political disputes OUT. Once you have placed any industry or institution into the public domain you’ve placed it’s entire operation into a political realm, and all the choices as to how it will be run will be made politically; “What special group of people shall we consider when choosing these textbooks?”, “How best to advocate some ‘scientific theory’ (global climate change, evolution, etc., etc.,) through film events and field trips?”, “What boundaries can I push to keep these little brats under control?” Etc., etc. Imagine Nancy Pelosi running ExxonMobil, see how cheap and abundant oil will be then.


6 posted on 05/07/2008 5:41:10 PM PDT by SkiKnee (It snows, therefore I ski.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hepatoma

That’s your opinion, but it isn’t mine. I find evidence of a Creator pervasive in the natural world.


7 posted on 05/07/2008 5:52:01 PM PDT by Marie2 (I used to be disgusted. . .now I try to be amused.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Marie2

I believe in a Creator as well, the same God of Abraham and Israel who sent Jesus Christ as mankind’s Savior.

But I also don’t believe God is limited by what we understand of the natural world.

There is PLENTY of evidence that the Earth is older than 6000 years.


8 posted on 05/07/2008 5:59:42 PM PDT by hepatoma
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Nonsense.


9 posted on 05/07/2008 6:04:42 PM PDT by Coyoteman (Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
I am an agnostic when it comes to explaining the origin of life.

... My main conflict with the evolutionists is that they wish to assert their theory as fact and to employ government power to ban discussion of creationism and intelligent design on the grounds that they are unscientific or, worse from their point of view, religious.

From this diatribe against Evolution, your first assertion is a lie.

Your second assertion is a sophism. Scientists do not claim a theory as fact. They do claim a scientific law has reached the level as a certain truth. Science is not claiming Evolution as a law.

Yes, it's taught in schools as a science because it is science. Creation is taught in religious schools because that's what they are willing to accept as truth.

If you want to be open minded you could go to a public school and to church and learn both views. No one is stopping you. For me, I don't want to waste time on creation fairy tales. I would rather review the evidence good science uncovers, so I'm happy that non secular schools stick to science.

10 posted on 05/07/2008 6:05:53 PM PDT by LoneRangerMassachusetts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind; All
I believe in the separation of church and state. I also believe in the separation of science and state. In fact, I believe in the separation of practically all aspects of life from the state, which should basically tote the mail and guard the coast.

If anybody wants to see the USSC's bogus separation of church and state disappear before their eyes, a politically correct perversion of our constitutional religious freedoms that was wrongly legislated from the bench when the Court decided Cantwell v. Connecticut in 1940, then please read the following post. Note that while the post concerns a 10 Commandments issue it is also applicable to this thread.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1992174/posts?page=22#22
The bottom line, as mentioned in the referenced post, is that the people need to reconnect with the Founder's division of federal and state powers, particularly where the wrongly ignored 10th A. power of the states to address religious issues is concerned, power now limited by the honest interpretation of the 14th Amendment. The people then need to get in the faces of renegade justices and do a major spring cleaning where USSC respect for our religious freedoms is concerned. President Lincoln put it this way.
"We the People are the rightful master of both congress and the courts - not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution." --Abraham Lincoln (Political debates between Lincoln and Douglas), 1858.

11 posted on 05/07/2008 6:08:01 PM PDT by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Marie2
"It drives me nuts that those who support the theory of evolution usually won’t let any alternate theories be taught. They usually want the only microphone."

Exactly so!

Over the years I have taken a lot of courses in diverse colleges, and your point is accurate.

12 posted on 05/07/2008 6:13:29 PM PDT by Radix (Q. What do you call a row of rabbits walking backwards? A. A receding hare line.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
"True science means simply the search for truth."

I think this would be a major point of argument with many of the posters on these threads advocating a teach-evolution-only in the schools position.

Repeatedly I have read the point: "ID (etc.) isn't science." But I have never seen them post a phrase such as "We should look for and seek truth."

On a subject such as this, it would be refreshing to see them say, "We are going to look at and analyze all the points of information submitted whether we define them as "science" or not, and work toward finding a theory which best fits with all the information available."

I've heard IDers and creationists say this, but never on these threads a proponent of evolution. (I have not read every thread however!)

What do you think, pro-evolution guys? (And please no lame answers like "They have no points of evidence.")

13 posted on 05/07/2008 6:13:48 PM PDT by ZGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spanalot

Wow, evolution passed you by because you make no sense.


14 posted on 05/07/2008 6:16:31 PM PDT by svcw (There is no plan B.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: hepatoma

My understanding of evolutionary theory is, the existence of a Creator is denied.


15 posted on 05/07/2008 6:17:46 PM PDT by Marie2 (I used to be disgusted. . .now I try to be amused.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Marie2

Theistic evolution


16 posted on 05/07/2008 6:21:00 PM PDT by hepatoma
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: ZGuy
But I have never seen them post a phrase such as "We should look for and seek truth." ... I've heard IDers and creationists say this, but never on these threads a proponent of evolution.

Perhaps there is a reason for this. The following is from a list of definitions on a CalTech physics website (the "and science" I have added):

Truth: This is a word best avoided entirely in physics [and science] except when placed in quotes, or with careful qualification. Its colloquial use has so many shades of meaning from ‘it seems to be correct’ to the absolute truths claimed by religion, that it’s use causes nothing but misunderstanding. Someone once said "Science seeks proximate (approximate) truths." Others speak of provisional or tentative truths. Certainly science claims no final or absolute truths. Source.


17 posted on 05/07/2008 6:22:11 PM PDT by Coyoteman (Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: hepatoma
There is PLENTY of evidence that the Earth is older than 6000 years.

It all depends on your relativistic frame of reference. In other words both young and old creation viewpoints are valid:

http://www.geraldschroeder.com/age.html

18 posted on 05/07/2008 6:43:56 PM PDT by Mogollon (Vote straight GOP for congress....our only protection against Obama-Clinton, or McCain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind; All
"My main conflict with the evolutionists is that they wish to assert their theory as fact..."

Macroevolution ideas, just like Creationism beliefs, have not been verified by the consistent results of repeatable, scientific-method based experiments. This is for the simple reason that proper scientific experimentation that would conclusively verify claims by evolutionists, such as the idea that single-cell organisms evolved into humans over billions of years for example, would likewise take billions of years to conduct; an impossibility. And then there is the "minor" problem of repeating such time-consuming experiments to verify outcome.

Also, experiments that were said to simulate long periods of evolution processes actually backfired by showing that harmful mutations could not be ignored.

This post (<-click), while addressing a 10 Commandments issue, gives an idea how FDR's disdain for 10th A. protected state powers arguably led to the USSC's scandalous limiting of our religious freedoms as evidenced by today's never-ending creationism versus evolution controversies.

The bottom line, as mentioned in the referenced post, is that the people need to reconnect with the Founder's division of federal and state powers, particularly where the wrongly ignored 10th A. power of the states to address religious issues is concerned, power now limited by the honest interpretation of the 14th Amendment. The people then need to get in the faces of renegade justices and do a major spring cleaning where USSC respect for our religious freedoms is concerned. President Lincoln put it this way.

"We the People are the rightful master of both congress and the courts - not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution." --Abraham Lincoln (Political debates between Lincoln and Douglas), 1858.

19 posted on 05/07/2008 6:47:12 PM PDT by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mogollon

<http://www.geraldschroeder.com/age.html

..s’cuse me.


20 posted on 05/07/2008 6:51:03 PM PDT by Mogollon (Vote straight GOP for congress....our only protection against Obama-Clinton, or McCain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-162 next last

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.

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