Help - Search - Member List - Calendar
Full Version: Evolution Vs. Creationism
Utopia-Politics > Utopia Politics > The Duel
moosegod
The current life on earth was reached at by an evolutionary process that required no involvement of a supernatural entity.

Descartes- are you going to be arguing from any particular faith's standpoint?
Descartes
Disclaimer:I do not believe in the point of view I am trying to uphold. I am an evolutionist.

Moving on, I'll either go Juedo-Christian as they are more accepted currently then say Greek or Intel Design. Have a prefrence?
moosegod
Judeo-Christian is easiest and perhaps the best supported. But, of course it's up to you.
Descartes
Judeo-Christian over any other religion yes.

The question is ID or Cism. You choose the topic, which one would you prefer?
moosegod
I would say Christianity. Intelligent Design includes far too much wriggle room on your end.
Descartes
Judeo-Christianity it is then. Its often up to the declaritive to make the first set of points. I'll be waiting.
Descartes
While I'm waiting I'll make a few points for my side.

1. Evolution is a could have observation not did.

A. We do not know the past. Because some believe it is possible that Evolution occured in the way that science belives does not make it true. It can not be more then a belief as science requires proof and there is none that evolution had to happed. Religion only requires faith, therefore it is possible to accept that Creation in the J-C(Judeo-Christian) way did happen, while we can only have the possibility without proof of evolution.

B. Creationism has more closer witnesses to the time of human creation then evolution. As there are people claiming each side, but Cism has witnesses closer to the time of human creation/evolution, therefore Cism is more likely to be accurate.

2. Evolution destroys morality and leads to devastating consequences.
A. Religion creates morality.
B. Belief in Evolution is a revolution against the Church.
C. Revolution against the Church gains power with every additional act.
D. Overthrow of the Church will lead to an abandonment of morality among ex-Christians.
E. Lack of Morality in America, a Superpower Hegemon lead primarily by Christians will cause the disregard for human life, therfore leading to war and nuclear devastation.

3. Belief in Evolution leads to Ontological Damnation (Martin Heidegger's philsophy adapted).
A. Begin with the principle of the real, and dead, Descartes: You can only know that you are real.
B. Add the Heidegger transformation: While you only know that you are real. The earth is real and every item has an essence, eg. a tree is more then just cells made of atoms, it has treeness(what makes a tree more then the sum of the parts).
C. Inside us is the world. What we percieve as the shells of things are made real to us by us perciving us, thus creating the world. Us precieving it through the sences makes it real.
D. The essence of everything is a mystery. As we only percieve the outer form we cannot know the essence of an object. The quest for perfection gives meaning to life, but if depends on the essence.
E. Evolution depends on the scientific method.
F. The scientific method trys to objectify the essences, by doing this we create the things in our own image.
G. This allows us to ignore the essence and only see the parts/resource in it, eg. in stead of a tree I see a large amount of burnable wood, the apple on it becomes not an apple but a source of calories.
H. Nature then becomes a standing reserve, something we are distant from.
I. With this distant nature everything but humans has no essence therefore no value.
J. But then humans can be thought of in terms of what resources they use, eg. this human ate 3 apples, not a human being, but just a consumer of certain resources.
K. This leads to the loss of the essence and meaning of life for humans.
L. Hence we are condemed to a life without meaning, ontological damnation.
M. Evolution reinforces the scientific method by using and supporting it.
N. Therefore the belief in Evolution leads us to ontological damnation, Cism avoids this by not reinforcing the scientific method.

Therefore Cism is better for 3 main reasons.
1. It can be shown to be true through the proper bounds of what created it, unlike evolution.
2. It is more historically likely to be accurate because the witnesses were closer in time to the event.
3. It avoids the ontological damnation that Evolution causes.
moosegod
Descartes- Let's try to stay on the topic of just evolution. Otherwise we'll start debating the issue of faith itself. And that one's been going since the dawn of rational thought.

Most of my information comes from American Atheists

1. The only proof of existence we have is tautological- "I was there". There is no proof that can be independantly verified.

2. Evolution is not responsible for the destruction of morality. That can be said (incorrectly) of lack of faith.

A. Religion creates certain kinds of morality. Who is to say that they are better than a lack of morality? In Judges 11:30-31, we have an agreement for a man to sacrifice his own child to Yahweh for victory. The promise is fufilled shortly afterwards.

E.

"The Colliers 1961 Yearbook (which discusses crime statistics for 1959) noted on page 173:

Crime registered a new all-time high in 1959, some 69% higher than a decade earlier and 128% greater than the rate in 1940.

According to FBI information, the crime rate continues to outpace population growth at a rate of 4 to 1, and serious crime increased 11% over last year’s figures for the first nine months of 1960.

What is surprising is that these increases in crime came during a religious revival in the 1950s that had caused “under God” to be put into the Pledge of Allegiance and “in God We Trust” put on the back of our paper money - all accompanied by a 25% claimed increase in total church membership from 1950 to 1959. "

3. This is really a faith debate, not one of evolution, and one we should avoid, leaving perhaps for another duel.

Descartes- Sorry if you didn't catch it. The opening argument for my side is the first post.

libvertaruan
I know I am not in this duel, but, as an observer I must ask about the following comment:

QUOTE
1. Evolution is a could have observation not did.


What the heck did you just say?
Descartes
QUOTE (Libertarian @ Oct 24 2003, 12:23 PM)
I know I am not in this duel, but, as an observer I must ask about the following comment:



What the heck did you just say?

Ok, what I said was this.

The scientific "proof" of evolution says that what is observed today in the biosphere can be explained through the theory of evolution. However there is no proof that evolution did happen. The best that can be said is that evolution perfectly describes what we observe now, but that does not mean that it did happen that way and we cannot know what actually happened because we were not there to observe from the current state of evolutionary mind that we have now.
Descartes
QUOTE
Descartes- Let's try to stay on the topic of just evolution.  Otherwise we'll start debating the issue of faith itself.  And that one's been going since the dawn of rational thought.


You can say that they are interwined. You can not debate a subset without considering implication of the whole set, eg. debating evolution is a debate of faith in part, or, debating about guns in war is still debating about war itself.

QUOTE
1.  The only proof of existence we have is tautological- "I was there".  There is no proof that can be independantly verified.


Existence, or do you mean evolution? For I was there doesn't apply to existence, and evolution we weren't.

QUOTE
2.  Evolution is not responsible for the destruction of morality.  That can be said (incorrectly) of lack of faith.


Evolution is a subset of the scientific mindset which destroys faith and hence morality. By supporting Eion you super SciMind, which attacks faith and morality.

QUOTE
A.  Religion creates certain kinds of morality.  Who is to say that they are better than a lack of morality?  In Judges 11:30-31, we have an agreement for a man to sacrifice his own child to Yahweh for victory.  The promise is fufilled shortly afterwards.


A child in a story years ago, or the Holocaust? Morality creates restrain from violence. Hence Morality good.

QUOTE
"The Colliers 1961 Yearbook (which discusses crime statistics for 1959) noted on page 173:

Crime registered a new all-time high in 1959, some 69% higher than a decade earlier and 128% greater than the rate in 1940.

According to FBI information, the crime rate continues to outpace population growth at a rate of 4 to 1, and serious crime increased 11% over last year’s figures for the first nine months of 1960.

What is surprising is that these increases in crime came during a religious revival in the 1950s that had caused “under God” to be put into the Pledge of Allegiance and “in God We Trust” put on the back of our paper money - all accompanied by a 25% claimed increase in total church membership from 1950 to 1959. "


There is no proof of a causal relationship, the evidence is only non case study, the same type of science that lead to women being perscribed HRT which they didn't know that it caused Breast Cancer until years after this type of study showed they were good.

QUOTE
3.  This is really a faith debate, not one of evolution, and one we should avoid, leaving perhaps for another duel.


Evolution is a subset of science. Cism is a subset of Faith. Debate the subset you debate the set.

QUOTE
Descartes- Sorry if you didn't catch it.  The opening argument for my side is the first post.


I took it to be a statement of intent because you didn't provide supporting evidence.

Lastly, I can answer all of these points, like I said I don't believe in Cism.
moosegod
QUOTE
I took it to be a statement of intent because you didn't provide supporting evidence.

I was just trying to open things up. Meh.

1. I know that. It's just that then we could debate for all eternity and get nowhere. Hence, my attempt to limit the debate.

2. I should check my typing better. It should have said: The only proof of existence at that time(the time of creation) we have is tautological- "I was there". There is no proof that can be independantly verified.

3. Sorry, all the acronyms confused the heck out of me and I can't make head nor tail of it.

4. But I have heard it said that Hitler was a Christian.

5. Exactly my point. There is no causal relationship between destruction/growth of faith and morality.

6. Refer to one.
Descartes
3. By supporting Evolution you support the scientific mindset, hence that links.

4. Yeah, so?

5. Yes there since morality is defined as something created by religion, maybe you're thinking of ethics.

Sorry, was away for a while.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2005 Invision Power Services, Inc.