BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth

Subject: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: bobad
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 09:03 PM

I don't know if the numbers are true but if they are I'd say it's pretty worrisome.

Graph

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: gnu
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 09:06 PM

Why worriesome?

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: Joe Offer
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 09:08 PM

Only 40% of Americans believe in evolution? A look at these Gallup Poll results indicates that number may be right. I thought it would be more like 75% of Americans believe in evolution.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: bobad
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 09:25 PM

I would think that the science literacy of such an advanced country would be much higher. Is the education system to blame?

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 09:29 PM

The folks who say they don't believe in evolution probably don't actually understand what it is in the first place, but have some crude definition of it in their minds...just like the people who say they don't believe in God.

Words are just vague and limited symbols to a lotta people, not actually demandin' any depth of thought about the subject.

- Chongo

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: Bill D
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 10:37 PM

For the last week or so, my bathrrom reading has been "Ever Since Darwin" by Steven Jay Gould. It's a collection of short essays on how people THOUGHT about evolution and the various arguments and tangents they went on.

It is an education in exactly how 'great thinkers' managed to do great injustices to Darwin, their own ideas and each others.

It's now 40 years old, but the ideas and explanations could serve in any age.

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 10:44 PM

Knowledge of the biological sciences on the part of North Americans is abysmal, but they are not alone. Similar statistics seem to apply to most countries.
The Newman Club and other organizations associated with the Catholic Church held sessions to counter evolutionary teaching when I was in university.

The position of some churches on some of the biological facts of life and the influence this has on health education is appalling.

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: Janie
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 10:51 PM

I'm gonna stay out of this one, at least for tonight.

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 10:51 PM

I think that the only country they included in the Americas is the US is alarming.

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: gnu
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 10:55 PM

WTF? I agree with a fictional ape? I must reflect upon my inner soul and tell it not to drink so much beer on Saturday nights.

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: artbrooks
Date: 16 Sep 12 - 12:28 AM

This from Gallup: some 78% of Americans today believe that God had a hand in the development of humans in some way, just slightly less than the percentage who felt this way 30 years ago. More here.

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: DMcG
Date: 16 Sep 12 - 03:00 AM

I don't know if the numbers are true but if they are I'd say it's pretty worrisome

Is someone claiming a causal connection between the axes? I don't see it myself. Rather both are related to something else, which we might call 'general level of education'.

Of course, you are quite entitled to worry about the numbers on each axis independently...

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: Stu
Date: 16 Sep 12 - 08:54 AM

When it comes to forming policy science is ignored just as much (or possibly even more so) than religion, which explains why the world is fucked, and our children and their descendants will suffer for our ignorance.

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Sep 12 - 09:11 AM

The folks who say they don't believe in evolution probably don't actually understand what it is in the first place, but have some crude definition of it in their minds...just like the people who say they don't believe in God.

So the people who do believe in God understand fully what it is they believe in, huh?

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: catspaw49
Date: 16 Sep 12 - 09:17 AM

I think its the combination of religion with the Flintstones.............


Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 16 Sep 12 - 09:49 AM

I think this is interesting from Q above:

"The Newman Club and other organizations associated with the Catholic Church held sessions to counter evolutionary teaching when I was in university.

The position of some churches on some of the biological facts of life and the influence this has on health education is appalling. "

As far as I know, the Catholic Church accepted the Darwinian evolution a very long tome (100 years+) ago, although I have met catholics who seemed to think their church did not - and hence neither should they.

Perhaps some informed catholics could tidy this up

L in C#

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: bobad
Date: 16 Sep 12 - 10:08 AM

From Wikipedia:

"Since the publication of Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species in 1859, the attitude of the Catholic Church on the theory of evolution has slowly been refined. For about 100 years, there was no authoritative pronouncement on the subject. In the 1950 encyclical Humani generis, Pope Pius XII confirmed that there is no intrinsic conflict between Christianity and the theory of evolution, provided that Christians believed that the individual soul is a direct creation by God and not the product of purely material forces.[1] Today, the Church's unofficial position is an example of theistic evolution, also known as evolutionary creation,[2] stating that faith and scientific findings regarding human evolution are not in conflict, though humans are regarded as a special creation, and that the existence of God is required to explain both monogenism and the spiritual component of human origins. Moreover, the Church teaches that the process of evolution is a planned and purpose-driven natural process, actively guided by God.[3][4][5]"

They've got the bases covered.

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: Stu
Date: 16 Sep 12 - 10:21 AM

"the Church teaches that the process of evolution is a planned and purpose-driven natural process"

And there it is in a nutshell.

They might have the bases covered in their own deluded minds, but in truth they don't accept evolution at all; by their very nature evolution and natural processes are neither planned or purpose-driven. Similarly, the idea that humans are regarded as 'a special creation' is arrogant, ignorant and one of those dangerous, nasty and invidious concepts that is responsible for shaping the ludicrous idea of man's dominion over the natural world.

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: Bill D
Date: 16 Sep 12 - 12:36 PM

Most discussions of the topic... including this one... have a built-in flaw.

When the phrase "believe in God" -by EITHER side- is used, with 'God' capitalized, there is an implicit suggestion that there IS a 'god' that we either accept or not.

To discuss it all in a neutral way, those who have doubts should say something like "believe in *a* god" or "believe in some metaphysical entity which created us and oversees daily events"... etc.

You think I am picking nits? *shrug*. Language & usage influence thought patterns more than a lot of us realize.

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 16 Sep 12 - 12:36 PM

"Knowledge of the biological sciences on the part of North Americans is abysmal, but they are not alone. Similar statistics seem to apply to most countries ..."

Replace "biological sciences" with "sciences" and I would agree with that statement. I live in the UK and until fairly recently I worked, as a scientist, in private industry. Most of my colleagues - some of whom has PhDs in science subjects - didn't have a clue! They seemed to rely on something which I call 'science lite' i.e. a combination of intuition, guesswork and tinkering around. The weird thing was that this 'method' wasn't even efficient - they all seemed to think that it had to involve an onerous, meaningless slog ... but that then seemed to earn them 'brownie points' with the bosses!

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: catspaw49
Date: 16 Sep 12 - 12:37 PM

Today's a flashback in the Doonesbury toon strip which fits right in here..........Sunday....9/16/2012



Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: Stu
Date: 16 Sep 12 - 01:12 PM

Spaw nails it . . . again. Sir, I raise a glass.

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 16 Sep 12 - 02:53 PM

North American? I don't think so.

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 16 Sep 12 - 03:02 PM

dont know much about economics and i,m sure most of you will say i dont know much of anything ,so i intend to leave you to the pursuit of congratulating each other on your unbelief !
best wishes   pete.

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 16 Sep 12 - 03:20 PM

Jack the Sailor, we have free-for-all (and I am not talking cost) "education" here in wonderful self-governing (almost) Alberta, Canada.

1. Catholic schools
2. Public schools (diminishing numbers)
3. Charter and private schools, which range all the way from strong scientifically based programs to very narrow evangelically-based 'curicula'. Expensive to reasonable cost.
4. Home schooling- the parents do it. Content beyond the basics depends on the beliefs of the parents.
5. Limited schooling for groups such as the Hutterites. Nothing past the 9th grade level, taught in the colonies.
6. Schooling in the Indian reservations, generally abysmal.

(Some groups- Muslim, Jewish, Chinese- have supplementary education, mainly cultural. Not really a problem.)

In other words, absolutely no control.

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Sep 12 - 07:15 PM

If you say you believe in evolution as long as it's understood that evolution was kick-started/driven/steered by God, you really don't believe in evolution at all. Darwin was a polite fellow, but he knew, and evolutionary biologists know, that evolutionary theory completely does away with the need for a creator.

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: mayomick
Date: 17 Sep 12 - 11:11 AM

I often read people saying that they "believe" in evolution , in much the same way as you hear religious people say that they believe in God . Doesn't the word "belief" imply that the evolutionist rationale is faith-based ? I don't "believe" in evolution , but having examined the matter , I do accept the overwhelming amount of evidence that supports the theory .

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 17 Sep 12 - 11:42 AM

Whether or not the premise is correct, It's a God-awful graphical presentation.

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: mayomick
Date: 17 Sep 12 - 12:09 PM

I thought graphs were supposed to simplify things.

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 17 Sep 12 - 02:30 PM

Shimrod has put forth a significant bit, which is that most people, even scientists, don't understand a lot of what what they could, and probably ought to know.

Consider evolution-what ever people say about what they believe, most people don't really have a functional understanding of it. Even if 78% of people say they believe something, if only, say, 20% actually understand it, what does "believe" even mean?

Now the fact is, most people do not much understand or much need to understand evolution However, because we are a "democratic society" we seem to believe that the opinions of people who don't understand things matter just as much as the opinions of people who do. That is the problem.

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: pdq
Date: 17 Sep 12 - 03:05 PM

"...because we are a 'democratic society' we seem to believe that the opinions of people who don't understand things matter just as much as the opinions of people who do. That is the problem."

Ain't that the truth.

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 17 Sep 12 - 04:42 PM

What is YOUR opinion on global climate change pdq?

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: TheSnail
Date: 17 Sep 12 - 05:10 PM

I often read people saying that they "believe" in evolution , in much the same way as you hear religious people say that they believe in God.

Thank you, mayomick. Previous "discussions" have made me reluctant to post to this thread, but when I hear people who consider themselves to be scientists talking about "believing in evolution" I cringe.

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 17 Sep 12 - 05:28 PM

"Shimrod has put forth a significant bit, which is that most people, even scientists, don't understand a lot of what what they could, and probably ought to know."

Thank you, Stim, but I suspect that it's worse than that. In the western, English speaking world we have a strong anti-intellectual element in our culture (we all know that people who are good at science are 'nerds', aren't they?). We've also been led to believe that our leaders should be relentlessly positive in outlook, bold, decisive and intuitive (and honesty and integrity are for 'geeks', aren't they?). So many people who are employed as scientists, and are in any way ambitious, soon realise that the best way to achieve their ambitions is to dump the nerdy, geeky science stuff and opt for a relentlessly positive, bold, decisive etc. approach to their careers.

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Sep 12 - 07:20 PM

OK, oh whingeing shelled one. Here it is again.

If you say you believe in evolution as long as it's understood that evolution was kick-started/driven/steered by God, you really don't believe in evolution at all.

I was responding to the thread in the same vein as the thread. Go ahead. Re-word it for me. I don't "believe in evolution", but I do believe you're trying to be a bit of a prick again.

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: gnu
Date: 17 Sep 12 - 07:50 PM

Evolution is a fact AS DEFINED. It happened, it's happening and it will happen again. It's got sweet fuck all to do with God except that some people think He invented it. Unless His name is Darwin. Well, he may not have invented it, but he did patent it.

It seems that some people on both sides of the NON-debate do not understand the concept of evolution. If they did, they would accept it as a scientific analysis (analyses) and postulate which has been fuckin proven, AS DEFINED, and has fuck all to do with whether God exists or not.

So... which came first? The chicken or the egg's evolution into a chicken?

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 17 Sep 12 - 09:35 PM

Without thinking all that much about it, my "first shot" at the graph linked in the first post would be that those interested enough in education to at least think they understand evolution (or most other well-founded science) are too busy with what's interesting than those who terminate their education (and thinking) when they figure out how to scam their first few bucka and learn "the joys of acquisitiveness." (a.k.a. greed?).

Perhaps it is worth mention that I've known several "science superstars" who were exceedingly poorly educated about much of anything except their chosen field.

"Learning more and more about less and less until we know everything about nothing?" - But is that all bad?

On the other side, the theories of evolution extant include the argument that most members of a colony (social order?) only need to learn (evolve) what is needed for their own survival within their environment so if you're surrounded by the Taliban (of any religion) it's probably safest to believe as they demand; and if you live among thieves it's probably better for your own survival if you learn a little of how to steal.(?)

John

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 18 Sep 12 - 09:39 AM

As per this:

"If you say you believe in evolution as long as it's understood that evolution was kick-started/driven/steered by God, you really don't believe in evolution at all."

The great man himself offers this:

"A celebrated author and divine has written to me that he has gradually learned to see that it is just as noble a conception of the Deity to believe that he created a few original forms capable of self-development into other and needful forms, as to believe that he required a fresh act of creation to supply the voids caused by the action of his laws." (Charles Darwin, Origin of Species p. 422)

You may comment, or just go off to your room and think it over:-)

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: TheSnail
Date: 18 Sep 12 - 09:58 AM

Thank you, Steve Shaw, for reminding me why I am reluctant to post to threads like this. I just can't compete with the intellectual precision of your arguments.

A couple of Nexts on the page bobad linked to takes you to this - Believe?

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Sep 12 - 12:27 PM

If you gave us the benefit of your opinions on the substantive matter instead of dedicating yourself to finding something to snipe at you wouldn't have to feel so reluctant.

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Sep 12 - 12:36 PM

A celebrated author and divine has written to me that he has gradually learned to see that it is just as noble a conception of the Deity to believe that he created a few original forms capable of self-development into other and needful forms, as to believe that he required a fresh act of creation to supply the voids caused by the action of his laws.

As far as I can make out that comment was penned by Charles Kingsley in a letter to Darwin, not by Darwin himself. My copy of Origin is of the first edition and there is no such entry on page 422. I think you'll find that Darwin was always driven by evidence, not evidence-innocent conjecture. He made some references to creation in his second edition, largely to deflect criticism from those of a religious bent. There is simply no need to consider that a creator kick-started life/evolution. There is certainly no evidence for it, though we always have that elephant in the room, The God Of The Gaps, for company.

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 18 Sep 12 - 01:15 PM

Steve, I think you are correct. I have a facsimile, I can't find that quote.

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: GUEST,saulgoldie
Date: 18 Sep 12 - 01:26 PM

Once again, I find it necessary to repeat some basics. BillD is right that semantics is everything.

We might "believe in" G-d, or Goddess, or a council of G-ds, The FSM (Praised be he!), or JR Bob Dobbs, or what have you. It is impossible to verify that such beings or forces exist. But one may believe in it/them nonetheless.

On the other hand, science is a process, in which one does not need to believe. It is a process. It is a process that does not require one to believe or disbelieve. If one does not like what happens when someone practices science and comes up with a reproducible result, one is obliged to provide another *process* for coming up with valid reproducible results.

If one thinks science is a bogus process, then I invite them to refuse to avail themselves of all that this process has introduced humanity to. Starting with that electronic thing under the keyboard that allows them to post ninniness to a "place" that does not really exist (sort of).

One does not "believe in" evolution, gravity, water, climate change, or the Sun. One either accepts that they exist whether or one willfully choose to be ignorant. Science is not a democracy or a choice. It just is.

Saul

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: TheSnail
Date: 18 Sep 12 - 01:36 PM

Thank you Saul.

What "substantive matter" is that, Steve? The only one that concerns me is that Evolution is not a belief system. Anyone who purports to be a scientist and talks about it as if it is is undermining the very basis of science.

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 18 Sep 12 - 03:17 PM

I put that up, Steve Shaw, to show that Darwin was not condescending and dissmissive.

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Sep 12 - 03:44 PM

He was a good tactician though, Stim. He had to be in order to deal with religious flak. You did, incidentally, give the impression that they were Darwin's words.

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Sep 12 - 03:47 PM

What "substantive matter" is that, Steve? The only one that concerns me is that Evolution is not a belief system. Anyone who purports to be a scientist and talks about it as if it is is undermining the very basis of science.

What the thread is about, rather than your obsessive desire to pick holes. And I don't do belief systems.

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 18 Sep 12 - 06:58 PM

Link

You can bet on it.

John

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Sep 12 - 07:27 PM

Science isn't really in the business of achieving certainties, such as ruling out the possibility of God. Actually, science can't deal with God at all, as his believers have put him beyond the laws of nature and thereby beyond the scope of science. Science can't be interested in God (which isn't to say that some scientists aren't). What many atheists think, especially those of a scientific frame of mind, is that this is entirely illegitimate, especially as it is not based on even the merest scrap of evidence. All that science can do is point out that the existence of God is suggested entirely on the basis of faith; moreover, he's not a very good competitor with the laws of nature when it comes to creation. You simply can't get away, rationally, with explaining the diversity and complexity of the universe by inventing something that is far more complex itself, that breaks the laws of nature at every turn and for which there is no evidence. Simple as that.

Subject: RE: BS: Belief in Evolution vs. National Wealth
From: gnu
Date: 18 Sep 12 - 08:18 PM

Saul... well said.