What do you call yourself?

[Atruthseeker]

Many people who believe in evolution do not like being called evolutionists, saying it's wrong or lazy. (And even have a problem with that sentence...) Anyway, you all know what I mean, so in order for me to address you correctly, what do you call yourselves? ( I don't want to hurt your fragile egos! ) Is it Evolutionists, Darwinists, Nnon-creationists/Materialists etc?
Ie, we may call ourselves 'creationists' and people know what we mean.

 

[fantome profane]

Many people who believe in evolution do not like being called evolutionists, saying it's wrong or lazy. (And even have a problem with that sentence...) Anyway, you all know what I mean, so in order for me to address you correctly, what do you call yourselves? ( I don't want to hurt your fragile egos! ) Is it Evolutionists, Darwinists, Nnon-creationists/Materialists etc?
Ie, we may call ourselves 'creationists' and people know what we mean.

You can call people who accept the theory of evolution “people who accept the theory of evolution”.

 

[Baydwin]

Many people who believe in evolution do not like being called evolutionists, saying it's wrong or lazy. (And even have a problem with that sentence...) Anyway, you all know what I mean, so in order for me to address you correctly, what do you call yourselves? ( I don't want to hurt your fragile egos! ) Is it Evolutionists, Darwinists, Nnon-creationists/Materialists etc?
Ie, we may call ourselves 'creationists' and people know what we mean.

Evolutionists is only annoying because it implies evolution is part of a believe system, instead of an observable, natural process.

Really, there isn't a name or term for people who understand evolution. We only really have terms for the people who choose to remain ignorant, like we call people flat-earthers but don't call everyone else round-earthers. Same for geocentrists, no-one goes around calling themselves heliocentrists anymore. Once something is accepted by the majority of credible scientists and the majority of the sane populous as true, it no longer requires a distinctive term.

 

[Humanistheart]

Many people who believe in evolution do not like being called evolutionists.

Educated. And no one believes in evolution. Belief is for faiths, not scientific concepts routed in fact.

 

[Tristesse]

Many people who believe in evolution do not like being called evolutionists, saying it's wrong or lazy. (And even have a problem with that sentence...) Anyway, you all know what I mean, so in order for me to address you correctly, what do you call yourselves? ( I don't want to hurt your fragile egos! ) Is it Evolutionists, Darwinists, Nnon-creationists/Materialists etc?
Ie, we may call ourselves 'creationists' and people know what we mean.

I like to be called Brian. I accept evolution because it's a fact. And for that reason I guess you can call me a rationalist.

 

[Atruthseeker]

So, anyone decided yet?

 

[Gabethewiking]

Many people who believe in evolution do not like being called evolutionists, saying it's wrong or lazy. (And even have a problem with that sentence...) Anyway, you all know what I mean, so in order for me to address you correctly, what do you call yourselves? ( I don't want to hurt your fragile egos! ) Is it Evolutionists, Darwinists, Nnon-creationists/Materialists etc?
Ie, we may call ourselves 'creationists' and people know what we mean.

Well, I do not "believe in evolution", I accept the facts of evolution.

"Evolutionists" is a very american term I can tell you, none of my Europeans friends have ever been called it or relates to it, Evolution is a fact and it is like calling someone a "Gravitationalist" (someone accepting Gravity) and so on.

I do not call myself either of these examples, I do not define myself with what facts of the world I accept (like I said, I accept Gravity but do not call myself Gravitationalist).

You could call me Ga Briel? You know.. My name?

 

[fantome profane]

So, anyone decided yet?

You can call people who accept the theory of evolution “people who accept the theory of evolution”.

What’s wrong with this?

 

[Atruthseeker]

Belief is for faiths, not scientific concepts routed in fact.

No, I didn't say 'those who 'belief' in evolution', I said those who 'believe'. So that means you then! Look at what the definition is:

• evolutionists

An evolutionist is someone who accepts the scientific theory that all living things evolved from a few simple life forms.

Or even this

• rationalists

If you describe someone as rationalist, you mean that their beliefs are based on reason and logic rather than emotion or religion.

See, beliefs are involved!!!!!
Otherwise you are saying you do not believe in evolution or you do not believe it took place? What the hector is your problem? Stop being so childish! 'Oh, please don't lable me! I am an individual! Mwwwwaaaa! :sad4: Plums! Get over yourselves....

 

[LoTrobador]

And how would you call someone who does not believe the world is only an illusion, produced by his/her mind, the only thing that exists? A non-solipsist? Asolipsist? Polypsistandtheexternalwordlist?

 

[Atruthseeker]

And how would you call someone who does not believe the world is only an illusion, produced by his/her mind, the only thing that exists? A non-solipsist? Asolipsist? Polypsistandtheexternalwordlist?

I like the third one best! The point I'm making is why, even though virtualy everyone knows who you refer to when using the word, do those who 'accept the theory of evolution' worry about being called 'evolutionists' when it describes their views ever so well, if not at least in that field of ther beliefs? (sorry, there's that word again...):angel2:

 

[Riverwolf]

I accept the theory of evolution. You are free to call me whatever you want for that; I won't get offended. Titles aren't important to me.

 

[fantome profane]

Atruthseeker, do you have me on ignore? I would just like to know so I won’t waste my time anymore. If you don’t respond to this I will assume you do have me on ignore.

But in the case that you are able to read this I have a question. Are you really looking to a different term to use, or are you trying to justify using the term “evolutionists”? I would just like to know what you are trying to do.

 

[LoTrobador]

I like the third one best! The point I'm making is why, even though virtualy everyone knows who you refer to when using the word, do those who 'accept the theory of evolution' worry about being called 'evolutionists' when it describes their views ever so well, if not at least in that field of ther beliefs? (sorry, there's that word again...):angel2:

I guess Materialists might argue with the -psist- part, though. And as for the reason why some might get annoyed by the term 'Evolutionist', I think it's been explained quite well in the previous posts.

 

[Half Asleep]

I like the third one best! The point I'm making is why, even though virtualy everyone knows who you refer to when using the word, do those who 'accept the theory of evolution' worry about being called 'evolutionists' when it describes their views ever so well, if not at least in that field of ther beliefs? (sorry, there's that word again...):angel2:

I like how you ignore most responses to your questions, you Round-Earth Gravitationalist!

 

[averageJOE]

Why the need to attach titles to everything?

 

[meogi]

even though virtualy everyone knows who you refer to when using the word

The suffix ist does virtually nothing for understanding. There are too many personal and societal associations with the word that comes before ist. If you don't understand what comes before, then your understanding of the ist is skewed, and can lead to annoying certain people.

Anyway, you all know what I mean, so in order for me to address you correctly, what do you call yourselves?

Address people by issues. Most people who deal with issues, care about how they are presented.

"Why is it that evolutionists think that ....." ---- Not so good.
"Why is it that ....." ---- Good.

 

[johnhanks]

Many people who believe in evolution do not like being called evolutionists, saying it's wrong or lazy.

I think "lazy" may be a quote from a post of mine a day or two ago. I made the point then that evolutionist is a coinage made up only to provide an antithesis to creationist. The latter can, I think, be used to describe a fairly homogeneous group of people united by a clearly defined set of beliefs with which they strongly identify. I do not believe the same is true of people who accept the scientific evidence for evolution: mere acceptance of one scientific theory among many does not define them in the same way.

 

[Kerr]

Many people who believe in evolution do not like being called evolutionists, saying it's wrong or lazy. (And even have a problem with that sentence...) Anyway, you all know what I mean, so in order for me to address you correctly, what do you call yourselves? ( I don't want to hurt your fragile egos! ) Is it Evolutionists, Darwinists, Nnon-creationists/Materialists etc?
Ie, we may call ourselves 'creationists' and people know what we mean.

I don´t call myself anything, really .

But about evolutionists... I consider the term the same was as I would consider the term gravitationalists or thermodynamicalist. Which is basically that it is silly. But that is my own, personal opinion.

 

[Atruthseeker]

Why the need to attach titles to everything?

Cos otherwise we'd all call each other 'Oi, you...er...uh....thingy-ma-jig...you there!'. Dad, Mom, Sir, Doctor, Professor, Mr, Lord, Mrs, Ms, Miss, god are all titles. No problem with those. They can describe a group of people. Attach a name to a title and you know who exactly one is referring to. That's why for sheer practical reasons there is a need to attach titles.:yes: