Freethought & Rationalism Archive

AbbyNormal · 03-16-2003, 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ageofreason2000
And Thirded

Can I Fourth the statement? Or is that just getting silly?

Seriously, once we start claiming absolute and non-questionable "truths" about the universe, we've stepped into the theistic realm. Scientists do not spell truth with a capital "T".

There are still many questions regarding evolution and as we answer them the theories (yes, *theory*) will be modified and I'm sure more questions raised. Scientists pursue truth, but rarely achieve it; we approach truth asymptotically.

Regards,
AbbyNormal

Clivedurdle · 03-17-2003, 06:27 AM

Um, Dawkins and Gould were agreeing a public statement about evolution just before Gould died.

it starts

Like any flourishing science, the study of evolution has its internal controversies, as we both know. But no qualified scientist doubts that evolution is a fact, in the ordinarily accepted sense in which it is a fact that the earth orbits the Sun.

clive

Non-praying Mantis · 03-19-2003, 09:20 AM

Hey, Lee Ann,

We just want you to learn something!

Evolution is both fact and a theory.

Robert, a.k.a. NPM

Oolon Colluphid · 03-19-2003, 09:46 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Lobstrosity
In science everything is theory; nothing is proven.

Whilst I agree with everything you've said, I think you might confuse folks with your usage of 'theory'. Of course nothing is proven in the mathematical sense; everything is provisional. However, there are plenty of 'facts' -- observations -- which fit into (or don't) the theories -- explanations -- we have. Facts are observations; theories are what we explain the facts with. Or, as Steve Gould put it:

Quote:

In the American vernacular, "theory" often means "imperfect fact"--part of a hierarchy of confidence running downhill from fact to theory to hypothesis to guess. Thus the power of the creationist argument: evolution is "only" a theory and intense debate now rages about many aspects of the theory. If evolution is worse than a fact, and scientists can't even make up their minds about the theory, then what confidence can we have in it? Indeed, President Reagan echoed this argument before an evangelical group in Dallas when he said (in what I devoutly hope was campaign rhetoric): "Well, it is a theory. It is a scientific theory only, and it has in recent years been challenged in the world of science--that is, not believed in the scientific community to be as infallible as it once was."

Well evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape-like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered.

Moreover, "fact" doesn't mean "absolute certainty"; there ain't no such animal in an exciting and complex world. The final proofs of logic and mathematics flow deductively from stated premises and achieve certainty only because they are not about the empirical world. Evolutionists make no claim for perpetual truth, though creationists often do (and then attack us falsely for a style of argument that they themselves favor). In science "fact" can only mean "confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional consent." I suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow, but the possibility does not merit equal time in physics classrooms.

Evolutionists have been very clear about this distinction of fact and theory from the very beginning, if only because we have always acknowledged how far we are from completely understanding the mechanisms (theory) by which evolution (fact) occurred. Darwin continually emphasized the difference between his two great and separate accomplishments: establishing the fact of evolution, and proposing a theory--natural selection--to explain the mechanism of evolution.

So, evolution, meaning shared common ancestry of all life, is a fact. And evolution, the Theory, is like all scientific theories the bundled set of hypotheses -- some very well verified, others more speculative -- which together explain the fact.

But anyway. Ref Darwin Day. Darwin isn't just for Christmas. Some of us fight the good fight all year round.

Cheers, DT

Aethari · 03-19-2003, 07:55 PM

Which is exactly why I don't get into arguments with these people, MNG....

But go Darwin Day, anyways.

~Aethari

fishbulb · 03-21-2003, 09:16 AM

Quote:

lobstrosity:

Everything in science is a theory. Science can give us nothing but theories. The minute you say something isn't a theory you put it outside the reach of science and make it a religion. That's a big no no.

I was under the impression that "evolution" is the term used to refer to the observed fact that species change over time, something which is borne out both by fossil evidence of creatures which have charateristics no longer found in existing specimens as well as lacking features which presently exist, as well as observations of changes in actual living creatures. In fact, we have been deliberately causing various creatures to evolve (through "artificial selection") for millenia. In the last few centuries alone we have caused many new breeds of dogs which had not previously existed to evolve, in addition to causing changes to all manner of other domestic plants and animals.

Natural selection is a scientific theory which seems to do a pretty bang up job of explaining how evolution could have and can continue to occur in the absence of deliberate intervention.

It seems to me that science offers us both facts and theories. Facts are what science has observed, theories are (well-tested and strongly confirmed) hypotheses that explain those facts.

Duvenoy · 03-21-2003, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Darwin's Terrier
Whilst I agree with everything you've said, I think you might confuse folks with your usage of 'theory'. Of course nothing is proven in the mathematical sense; everything is provisional. However, there are plenty of 'facts' -- observations -- which fit into (or don't) the theories -- explanations -- we have. Facts are observations; theories are what we explain the facts with. Or, as Steve Gould put it:

So, evolution, meaning shared common ancestry of all life, is a fact. And evolution, the Theory, is like all scientific theories the bundled set of hypotheses -- some very well verified, others more speculative -- which together explain the fact.

But anyway. Ref Darwin Day. Darwin isn't just for Christmas. Some of us fight the good fight all year round.

Cheers, DT

Well said, Dr. Gould! Well said, Oolon!

doov

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-17-2003, 06:27 AM	#12
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	Um, Dawkins and Gould were agreeing a public statement about evolution just before Gould died. it starts Like any flourishing science, the study of evolution has its internal controversies, as we both know. But no qualified scientist doubts that evolution is a fact, in the ordinarily accepted sense in which it is a fact that the earth orbits the Sun. clive

03-19-2003, 09:20 AM	#13
Non-praying Mantis Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Roanoke, VA, USA Posts: 2,646	Hey, Lee Ann, We just want you to learn something! Evolution is both fact and a theory. Robert, a.k.a. NPM

03-19-2003, 07:55 PM	#15
Aethari Veteran Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Maryland, USA Posts: 1,635	Which is exactly why I don't get into arguments with these people, MNG.... But go Darwin Day, anyways. ~Aethari

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.