Heyo
Veteran Member
This is planned to be a series of posts that is trying to explain the Theory of Evolution (ToE) in a way that it is understandable by creationists, old earth (OEC) and young earth (YEC) alike.
It is inspired by multiple exchanges with @Deeje. I will focus on her understanding but I didn't want to make this a one-on-one debate. Questions from all creationists are welcome (though I may not answer them if I don't think them to be necessary for understanding, already answered or off topic). Corrections by more science savvy people than me are especially encouraged as I don't want this to rest on fallacies.
In my time as a tutor for maths I've recognized that the apparent failure to understand a specific concept often is not with the topic itself but a past misunderstanding of a more basic concept. The same goes for creationists who think that Evolution doesn't make sense. Most of the time they don't have a problem understanding evolution but they have problems with taxonomy or science in general or sometimes even rational thinking. (And then there are those who's paycheck depends on them not understanding, but I'll leave them out for brevity.)
The didactic of this approach is meant for adults who are familiar with structured reasoning. That's why I start with the basics of science and built up to the ToE. A plan for future parts include the scientific method, taxonomy (Linné), The Origin of Species (Darwin), Palaeontology (maybe with an excursion into geology), Genetics and up to the modern synthesis and extended evolutionary synthesis.
Long intro, short lecture:
What is Science?
1. Science is the systematic enterprise to gain knowledge about the natural world (universe). 2. This is done by creating models with explanatory and predictive power which can be and are tested by their predictions.
To do what science is out to do, it has to make some assumptions that can't be derived (though they can be falsified through testing or logic). The three axioms of science are:
3. The universe is real.
4. The universe is orderly.
5. The universe is knowable.
There are different formulations of these axioms which are equivalent.
It is here where the first disputes can arise. Many religious creationists can't agree on these axioms. For some Hindu and Buddhist the world is but an illusion so they disagree with the first axiom. For some Christian and Muslim traditions knowledge must be revealed and can't be gained by science. They don't agree with the third axiom.
The most controversial of all is the second. It can be reformulated as "There is no magic."
When you don't agree with these axioms or don't understand their implications, you have a problem with science, not a problem with the ToE.
@Deeje: Do we agree on this definition of science?
Do you have questions?
It is inspired by multiple exchanges with @Deeje. I will focus on her understanding but I didn't want to make this a one-on-one debate. Questions from all creationists are welcome (though I may not answer them if I don't think them to be necessary for understanding, already answered or off topic). Corrections by more science savvy people than me are especially encouraged as I don't want this to rest on fallacies.
In my time as a tutor for maths I've recognized that the apparent failure to understand a specific concept often is not with the topic itself but a past misunderstanding of a more basic concept. The same goes for creationists who think that Evolution doesn't make sense. Most of the time they don't have a problem understanding evolution but they have problems with taxonomy or science in general or sometimes even rational thinking. (And then there are those who's paycheck depends on them not understanding, but I'll leave them out for brevity.)
The didactic of this approach is meant for adults who are familiar with structured reasoning. That's why I start with the basics of science and built up to the ToE. A plan for future parts include the scientific method, taxonomy (Linné), The Origin of Species (Darwin), Palaeontology (maybe with an excursion into geology), Genetics and up to the modern synthesis and extended evolutionary synthesis.
Long intro, short lecture:
What is Science?
1. Science is the systematic enterprise to gain knowledge about the natural world (universe). 2. This is done by creating models with explanatory and predictive power which can be and are tested by their predictions.
To do what science is out to do, it has to make some assumptions that can't be derived (though they can be falsified through testing or logic). The three axioms of science are:
3. The universe is real.
4. The universe is orderly.
5. The universe is knowable.
There are different formulations of these axioms which are equivalent.
It is here where the first disputes can arise. Many religious creationists can't agree on these axioms. For some Hindu and Buddhist the world is but an illusion so they disagree with the first axiom. For some Christian and Muslim traditions knowledge must be revealed and can't be gained by science. They don't agree with the third axiom.
The most controversial of all is the second. It can be reformulated as "There is no magic."
When you don't agree with these axioms or don't understand their implications, you have a problem with science, not a problem with the ToE.
@Deeje: Do we agree on this definition of science?
Do you have questions?