Barry
New Member
Person
Posts: 17
|
Post by Barry on Nov 26, 2009 12:38:09 GMT
I see this as a social phenomenon. That's why I've posted here. I've spent the last few years trying, and failing, to understand this mindset. The nearest I've ever got to it was when I had a longish, quite frank discussion with 'Jorge' on the discussion board, TheologyWeb. When I have time, I'll try to dig it out of their archives, if it is still there. Jorge basically said that without his beliefs, he would be like a man overboard, or someone caught out in the open in a violent storm. His beliefs were the only thing he felt he could hold on to - like a bit of flotsam at sea, or a lone tree on a mountain. It was apparent that he was terrified of letting go, but of course, his beliefs, and his Morton's Demon, ( home.entouch.net/dmd/mortonsdemon.htm ) prevented him from learning anything that could sustain him if he did let go. Anyway, please add to this thread if you have any insights or facts about creationism. Gotta go offline for now, but I'll be back later. |
|
|
|
Post by zenjael on Nov 26, 2009 14:32:21 GMT
Barry! you're here too?!
Unfortunantely I am pressed for time, but I would like to reply as soon as I get back. That is a promise.
|
|
naz
Full Member
SYNTHEIST
Posts: 245
|
Post by naz on Nov 26, 2009 17:39:18 GMT
I think we all know that creationism is not defended because it is based on "better science". It is defended as part of a general defense of the bible as the inerrant word of God. I can tell you from experience that realizing that it is not is a traumatic experience. Because of the enormous investment one makes in believing it is. So it is difficult to get people to part with that idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by harrietfurther on Nov 26, 2009 19:31:30 GMT
I see this as a social phenomenon. That's why I've posted here. I've spent the last few years trying, and failing, to understand this mindset. The nearest I've ever got to it was when I had a longish, quite frank discussion with 'Jorge' on the discussion board, TheologyWeb. When I have time, I'll try to dig it out of their archives, if it is still there. Jorge basically said that without his beliefs, he would be like a man overboard, or someone caught out in the open in a violent storm. His beliefs were the only thing he felt he could hold on to - like a bit of flotsam at sea, or a lone tree on a mountain. It was apparent that he was terrified of letting go, but of course, his beliefs, and his Morton's Demon, ( home.entouch.net/dmd/mortonsdemon.htm ) prevented him from learning anything that could sustain him if he did let go. Anyway, please add to this thread if you have any insights or facts about creationism. Gotta go offline for now, but I'll be back later. I agree with Naz that the adoption of creationism seems to have little to do with actual science. I find it hard to believe that anyone would set out to do research and come to a creationist conclusion unless that's what they were actually looking for. It's a mindset that I think has more to do with need, as with your friend Jorge. I spoke to a friend of mine about it and his response was that he didn't really think about it much (not such a hot-button issue in the UK) but that he was inclined to reject evolution just because it 'seemed so unlikely' and 'didn't make much sense'. He hadn't ever researched in any great depth because he didn't see the need to - his ideology had already explained the world for him and so despite being an intelligent, honest guy he rejects this part of science by default. If he did the research, I think he's honest enough to admit his fault, but he never will. He doesn't need evolution to complete his worldview, but he does need the Bible. Maybe he's scared that evolution will actually make sense; maybe he just doesn't even give it a second thought. God already answers every question that he has. I hate to quote Dawkins, it feels so uncool, but I love this from the God Delusion: "If you don't understand how something works, never mind: just give up and say God did it. You don't know how the nerve impulse works? Good!... Please don't go to work on the problem, just give up and appeal to God. Dear scientist, don't work on your mysteries. Bring us your mysteries, for we can use them. Don't squander precious ignorance by researching it away. We need these glorious gaps as a last refuge for God. " (emphasis mine) That's a big part of the mindset: you have a few diehard asshats on the front line deliberately lying and misrepresenting the facts and millions of honest people being duped because they haven't been taught to question - they've been taught that there's no need to even think twice. Mysteries are there to be preserved not solved! Thinking about it, I'd love to speak to a former creationist to see if any of this is on base, it's very speculative. Know any who might come play? Yours, Harriet |
|
|
|
Post by yahwehisreal on Nov 26, 2009 23:29:30 GMT
I don't have much experience with evolutionists, so I'm basing my opinion on limited experience, but it seems to me that evolution for the most part is used by atheists to prove there is no God rather than it's just good science. So, Christians are less receptive to it.
|
|
naz
Full Member
SYNTHEIST
Posts: 245
|
Post by naz on Nov 27, 2009 0:18:00 GMT
I don't have much experience with evolutionists, so I'm basing my opinion on limited experience, but it seems to me that evolution for the most part is used by atheists to prove there is no God rather than it's just good science. So, Christians are less receptive to it. Using evolution as a means of disproving God's existence would be rather silly. The latter does not follow from the former. Rather many atheists see it as one less reason to believe in God. |
|
Barry
New Member
Person
Posts: 17
|
Post by Barry on Nov 27, 2009 4:57:05 GMT
I don't have much experience with evolutionists, so I'm basing my opinion on limited experience, but it seems to me that evolution for the most part is used by atheists to prove there is no God rather than it's just good science. So, Christians are less receptive to it. We're from different worlds. Growing up and going to British schools, I was taught about Christianity, and I was taught about evolution. There was never any suggestion that the two were in conflict. I thought that creationism was an historical curiosity from the time, before Darwin, when people began to work out that the earth was very ancient. I'm not quite so ancient. I'm 60 years old, but it was only about five years ago that I found out that there were still people who believed that the creation story was literally true, and that evolution was a plot deliberately made up just to prove them wrong! |
|
cleo
New Member
Posts: 24
|
Post by cleo on Nov 27, 2009 7:37:12 GMT
In response to Yahwehisreal, I am in agreement with Barrie on this one... I am a Christian in the UK, and over here most christians have less problems reconciling evolution and their faith than struggling with what they percieve as the cognitive dissonance of believing in literal 7 day creation and aligning that with scientific evidence and thought.
I think as christians, we need to be pursuers of truth rather than rigidly holding to historical ways of interpreting scripture.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roarian on Nov 27, 2009 13:15:03 GMT
I don't have much experience with evolutionists, so I'm basing my opinion on limited experience, but it seems to me that evolution for the most part is used by atheists to prove there is no God rather than it's just good science. So, Christians are less receptive to it. Evolution doesn't say anything about the existence of a God, unless this deity necessarily has to have created everything in 7 days, as static species. From a Christian perspective, God left you two books : the bible, mostly focusing on social stuff, and the book that is all around you ; reality.  |
|
hrg
New Member
Posts: 17
|
Post by hrg on Nov 27, 2009 13:34:04 GMT
I don't have much experience with evolutionists, so I'm basing my opinion on limited experience, but it seems to me that evolution for the most part is used by atheists to prove there is no God rather than it's just good science. So, Christians are less receptive to it. Whether or not it is used to prove or disprove any theological claim doesn't change the fact that it is good science. BTW, even the arch-fiend ;D Dawkins says that the theory of evolution disproves any god; it just removes an argument for the existence of some god. |
|
hrg
New Member
Posts: 17
|
Post by hrg on Nov 27, 2009 13:35:11 GMT
I see this as a social phenomenon. That's why I've posted here. I've spent the last few years trying, and failing, to understand this mindset. The nearest I've ever got to it was when I had a longish, quite frank discussion with 'Jorge' on the discussion board, TheologyWeb. When I have time, I'll try to dig it out of their archives, if it is still there. Jorge basically said that without his beliefs, he would be like a man overboard, or someone caught out in the open in a violent storm. His beliefs were the only thing he felt he could hold on to - like a bit of flotsam at sea, or a lone tree on a mountain. It was apparent that he was terrified of letting go, but of course, his beliefs, and his Morton's Demon, ( home.entouch.net/dmd/mortonsdemon.htm ) prevented him from learning anything that could sustain him if he did let go. As the old quip says, he uses his faith like a drunk uses a lamppost - not as a source of enlightenment, but as a means of support ;D |
|
Barry
New Member
Person
Posts: 17
|
Post by Barry on Nov 27, 2009 14:07:38 GMT
I don't have much experience with evolutionists, so I'm basing my opinion on limited experience, but it seems to me that evolution for the most part is used by atheists to prove there is no God rather than it's just good science. So, Christians are less receptive to it. Karma to you for showing up in this coven of 'evilutionists' and having the courage to post in it. Hopefully, you will find other like-minded people turning up here.  Er.. karma as soon as I can figure out how to award it. I found it once, now I can't find it again!  Update: Karma 'exulted'. It seems that exultations and smitings are limited to one a day. |
|
|
|
Post by ydoaPs on Nov 27, 2009 14:27:50 GMT
I can tell you from experience that realizing that it is not is a traumatic experience. Because of the enormous investment one makes in believing it is. As can I. I was a die hard Baptist until I start debating the Evilutionists on the interwebs. I slowly started to realize that the creationist caricature of both Evolution and the 'controversy' are strawmen. Then the house of cards came tumbling down. I don't have much experience with evolutionists, so I'm basing my opinion on limited experience, but it seems to me that evolution for the most part is used by atheists to prove there is no God rather than it's just good science. So, Christians are less receptive to it. Using evolution as a means of disproving God's existence would be rather silly. The latter does not follow from the former. Rather many atheists see it as one less reason to believe in God. Quoted for Truth. |
|
|
|
Post by ergaster on Nov 27, 2009 14:27:50 GMT
I don't have much experience with evolutionists, so I'm basing my opinion on limited experience, but it seems to me that evolution for the most part is used by atheists to prove there is no God rather than it's just good science. So, Christians are less receptive to it. The only problem with that hypothesis is that most Christians do not reject evolution, and know that it is not a "tool" for atheists. It simply is how the world works, and rejecting an aspect of how the world works is in effect rejecting part of God and His creation. I'm presuming that there is no "law" here about linking to blogs, so here is a recent post by John Wilkins, which I link to because he quotes a recent letter in the journal Nature: Darwin was not roundly rejected by Christians back in the day. evolvingthoughts.net/2009/11/26/darwin-was-not-badly-received-by-the-church/ Rejection of evolution by certain Christians is a relatively modern phenomenon. (Apologies for any messed up links and formatting and so on--still figuring out the way stuff works.....) |
|
|
|
Post by dahduh on Nov 27, 2009 21:28:00 GMT
I see this as a social phenomenon. Perhaps you could even call it a 'moral phenomenon'. Ken Miller when giving a talk on the Dover trial flipped a great cartoon of evolution vs. creationism, and makes the case this is not a scientific dispute at all, but a moral one. Creationists are confined within a moral matrix in which they believe they are moral and evolutionists are evil - see abortion, racism, pornography etc. balloons flying above the evilutionist castle! What this means is that "Morton's demon" as you put it has some real material to work with. He has a moral imperative to accept only confirming evidence and discard contrary evidence. Dan Dennett calls this an example of a 'diabolical lie', a lie that once you have bought into is impossible to dislodge simply because the information to contradict the lie is cleverly blocked out. It is a major tool used by many social movements, e.g. all commies are conspirators, every capitalist is an agent of the CIA. From what I can gather most fundies 'aha' moment comes when they suddenly realize that they are being lied to, and suddenly the moral switch flips. Even in something like anti-vaxers; a lot of them only flipped when it was revealed that Andrew Wakefield had committed fraud, when for years they had been quite happy to ignore piles of evidence demonstrating that he was just wrong. Former fundies, do you agree with this? Do you think it was your moral instincts that were manipulated? And, how the hell does one get over this moral moat? Is there some magic button one can press to get people to see they are being lied to? |
|
