Comments
Nice. I was just at the Museum of Natural History on Sunday. I love the little evolution section.
Google is cool for celebrating this.
I quite enjoyed that argument between you and that dude on Facebook. I just cannot fathom how people can expect “Well we don’t understand how things work and they’re so confusing” to be held on the same level as scientific findings. So the logic is “I don’t understand this so there must be a god.” So by that logic the more religious one is the less knowledgable they are? Which I"m willing to believe but I don’t quite think that is how they want that argument to turn out.
There’s another one going on now, this time about microevolution. I really enjoy talking to that guy because, despite my being completely flabberghasted by the things he believes, he’s well-educated, respectful, and makes points that require thought and deliberation to respond to.
I wish more believers would be willing to have these sorts of respectful, enjoyable arguments.
That’s all well and good but to be blunt about it, why should you have to have that discussion or debate someone on that. I mean you’re discussing science and fact and data and evidence and he’s discussing his wide eyed wonder at how big and confusing the world is. I mean the most generous reading possible is that you’re arguing science while he’s arguing philosophy, which is absurd. But the reality is it’s even more absurd because he really does think that he’s arguing science.
I mean if someone wants to say I believe that God created the earth and all it’s creatures and that evolution is a scientific process that he created (which is probably closer to what most people actually do believe) then that’s just ducky. Because it would be just as stupid for an atheist to say that evolution proves that there is no god. But it doesn’t seem like that’s what he is saying.
I think it’s fun to approach the point where science and religion meet in the theists mind and play in that space. Plus there’s the challenge of it all. I think I’m a pretty good debater when I’m actually trying and I know this subject particularly well, so it’s fun to try to get them to concede points.
I’m sure he’d disagree, but it seems our most recent conversation has my opponent conceding a number of points about evolution and the nature of genealogy that he’d rather not have ceded.
More so, I enjoy the opportunity to explain how I’ve reached my own conclusions. Many theists just assume my stance is just a negative reaction to theism and that just as much faith is required to not believe as there is to believe. But I feel part of the value of these debates is letting theists know where exactly the scientific method stands in regards to belief and how my ideas were formed compared to theirs.
All in all, it’s just a fun exercise in communication and a sharing of worldviews.
I guess my problem is that it doesn’t stay confined to debates between individuals. It spills into schools and into the media and is presented as a “opposing viewpoints” subject when it’s not.
Well, that’s also part of the challenge: keeping them on topic.