Why are people afraid of creationism?

[Shakeel]

What if the evidence contradicts the teachings? Shouldn't we follow the evidence wherever it leads? even if it leads to questioning the teachings?

There's evidence for the teachings. No, I don't question the teachings.

 

[Shakeel]

Eggs came before chickens. The ancestors of chickens laid eggs.

But it wasn't always a chicken egg. If that's the logic then it's just a useless trick question.

 

[Shakeel]

"i don't believe it", is not a valid objection.
That's just an argument from incredulity.

It's precisely an objection and not an argument at all.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

It's precisely an objection and not an argument at all.

As I said: yes, it's an objection. Just not a valid one.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

There's evidence for the teachings. No, I don't question the teachings.

Like a good dogmatic follower of your religion, you succesfully dodged the actual question.


That question being: what if the evidence / reality contradicts the teachings?

Do you assume that reality is incorrect?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

But it wasn't always a chicken egg. If that's the logic then it's just a useless trick question.

The question isn't "what came first the chicken or the chicken-egg"
The question is just "chicken or egg".

If you want to change it to the first question, then the answer is "none - they evolved simultanously"

 

[Polymath257]

There's evidence for the teachings. No, I don't question the teachings.

OK, for me, that is problematic. We should question all beliefs. We may decide, based on evidence, that they are correct. But we should still challenge them. We should see which beliefs the evidence supports. If two systems of beliefs seem to work, we should try to find a test that distinguishes them.

And, yes, that include religious, political, scientific, mathematical, artistic, and all other types of beliefs.

 

[Polymath257]

But it wasn't always a chicken egg. If that's the logic then it's just a useless trick question.

No, it was NOT always a chicken egg, just as the ancestors were not always chickens. Species change over time.

And again, there is no a fine line between 'chicken' and 'non-chicken'. And hazy lines mean transitions can happen where everything looks similar at each step, but the ends are very different.

 

[night912]

Then you can't say the egg came first because that was the first chicken. The implication was quite clear. You even affirmed it. Inclining to illogical thinking is a fault in intelligence.

The egg came before the chicken but the chicken came before the chicken egg.

 

[Mock Turtle]