Difference between revisions of "Darwinism"

From Issuepedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(related pages to "anti-Darwinism"; added sourcewatch; tweaks)
(→‎Links: anonymous Christian poster objects to the term)
Line 29: Line 29:
 
===Filed Links===
 
===Filed Links===
 
{{links.tagged}}
 
{{links.tagged}}
 +
==Quotes==
 +
{{excerpt|An anonymous poster on The Panda's Thumb [http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2006/09/the_politically_legal.html#comment-97336 said, on 2006-09-06]:}}
 +
As someone who is a committed [[Christian]] and recently had to resign my position teaching high-school biology because the school administration began officially teaching [[intelligent design|ID]], I get very tired of the mentions of [[Darwinism]] and Darwinists by that side. It is a not-so-subtle way of framing the discussion in terms of [[religion]] – putting an “ism” and an “ist” on the end makes people start thinking of it as a philosophy which can be debated with other philosophies, or even better, a religion. Yes, all of who accept [[evolution]] also accept Darwin’s thoughts on it, for the most part, and therefore could be called “Darwinists”. But I resist the label, as it is the same path as the West labeling the Other as Buddhism, Mohammedism, etc. It’s the idea that Christianity is the one true faith, and any faith we want to denigrate, we put an “ism” at the end. Adding that suffix turns evolution into a religion to be debated on those grounds. Then, if enough of the laymen hear this term, they begin to think it must be religious, because obviously, it has ism at the end. I have half a mind, next time I’m asked “Are you a Darwinist?” to respond that I’m not familiar with the term. “But are you a stupidist believer in troglodytism?”
 +
{{-excerpt}}

Revision as of 21:21, 20 May 2008

Overview

Darwinism is a philosophical position which holds that the scientific theory of evolution by natural selection (EbNS), which was first published by Charles Darwin in his book The Origin of Species in 1859, is scientifically "true" – i.e. that it is the explanation of species origins which best fits all the available evidence. Generally, those who agree with the Darwinian position hold that it is not only the best explanation but by far the best explanation, with no other explanation even coming close (excepting minor variations of EbNS itself).

Those who hold this position generally do not describe themselves as "Darwinists"; the term was invented as an attack on the theory of evolution by natural selection. The term is intended to make it seem (at least, to an uninformed audience) that this position – which is based on mountains of scientific evidence and has been ruthlessly scrutinized for over a century – with a term that makes it seem like just another ideology (or "-ism").

Correspondingly, those who attack EbNS – by working to prevent schools from teaching it (or at least working to require that their own pseudo-theories should be taught as equally valid), and generally undermining its credibility – by intellectually dishonest means (and frequently just flat-out lying) are probably best described as anti-Darwinists; they are not attacking the EbNS theory on rational grounds, in a way which might lead to revelation of genuine flaws in the theory, but rather merely as another religion to be beaten into submission by any means necessary.

Support

The Darwinian position (i.e. that EbNS is most likely true) is overwhelmingly embraced by the scientific community. It is relentlessly consistent with massive amounts of data collected across multiple scientific disciplines, including anthropology, biology, geology, medicine, and psychology. need to collect more on this

"Nothing in biology makes sense except in light of evolution." – Daniel Dennett

Opposition

See anti-Darwinism.

Related Terms

The ideas behind Darwinism are often confused with other seemingly-similar concepts:

Links

Reference

Editorials / Opinion

Projects

  • The Journal of Evolutionary Philosophy: "Dedicated to promoting the theory of evolution as a solid foundation upon which to build a meaningful philosophy of human life" (thus helping to counter the religionist claim that there can be no meaning to life without God/religion)

Filed Links

  1. redirect template:links/smw

Quotes

An anonymous poster on The Panda's Thumb said, on 2006-09-06:

As someone who is a committed Christian and recently had to resign my position teaching high-school biology because the school administration began officially teaching ID, I get very tired of the mentions of Darwinism and Darwinists by that side. It is a not-so-subtle way of framing the discussion in terms of religion – putting an “ism” and an “ist” on the end makes people start thinking of it as a philosophy which can be debated with other philosophies, or even better, a religion. Yes, all of who accept evolution also accept Darwin’s thoughts on it, for the most part, and therefore could be called “Darwinists”. But I resist the label, as it is the same path as the West labeling the Other as Buddhism, Mohammedism, etc. It’s the idea that Christianity is the one true faith, and any faith we want to denigrate, we put an “ism” at the end. Adding that suffix turns evolution into a religion to be debated on those grounds. Then, if enough of the laymen hear this term, they begin to think it must be religious, because obviously, it has ism at the end. I have half a mind, next time I’m asked “Are you a Darwinist?” to respond that I’m not familiar with the term. “But are you a stupidist believer in troglodytism?”