Why do people deny evolution?

@rosborne979,

Quote:

Agreed, which is why it's the default. But you know intellectually that it could be a delusion. So you make a choice, which is subjective; a belief. I'm just pointing that out for academic understanding. I'm not recommending that we switch to the other model of "delusion is probable".

I agree, but Frank will not since he believes that if you can't disprove something it must be treated as a possibility.

1 Reply

@JimmyJ,

JimmyJ wrote:

I agree, but Frank will not since he believes that if you can't disprove something it must be treated as a possibility.

The point I was making is unrelated to Frank's implications.

But if you look clinically at Frank's argument, I think you will see that he is making a strict philosophical argument within vary narrow semantic definitions. In most cases where I've seen people debate with Frank I see the debaters talking "past" each other due to minor differences in definitions of terms. Just an observation.

0 Replies

@JimmyJ,

JimmyJ wrote:

Science doesn't require faith.

Not faith, just trust?

1 Reply

@JimmyJ,

JimmyJ wrote:

The natural world is all we have to go on since we've never known anything else.

So you are willing to acknowledge the limits of our knowledge?

2 Replies

@Ticomaya,

Quote:

Not faith, just trust?

If you want more than that you can simply go to web of knowledge, google scholar, or any scientific journal and look at the evidence for yourself.

1 Reply

@Ticomaya,

I would accept Tico that our knowledge is limited to the natural world.

1 Reply

@Ticomaya,

Quote:

So you are willing to acknowledge the limits of our knowledge?

I'll acknowledge in this particular case that there is no way to know whether we are living in a real world or whether every day we are living in a delusion.

In that regard we are limited. However, in the natural world our knowledge is limitless.

2 Replies

@JimmyJ,

JimmyJ wrote:

Quote:
Not faith, just trust?

If you want more than that you can simply go to web of knowledge, google scholar, or any scientific journal and look at the evidence for yourself.

And one with faith can go to the Bible.

1 Reply

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

I would accept Tico that our knowledge is limited to the natural world.

Yes it is. Which would include our knowledge of physics.

1 Reply

@Ticomaya,

Quote:

And one with faith can go to the Bible.

No evidence=waste of time (unless you want to use it to point out discrepancies to christians)

1 Reply

@Ticomaya,

Quote:

Yes it is. Which would include our knowledge of physics.

I don't see where you're going with this.

0 Replies

@JimmyJ,

If we allow that we are in a delusion then what knowledge is is a delusion and as such could not be either limited or limitless unless the delusion allows it to be and the delusion must be a delusion as well.

Is there not an infinite regress of delusion once we allow we are in a delusion and an infinite regress of delusions must be also a delusion with no ultimate delusion possible. It goes without saying, but I'll say it anyway, that an infinite regress being a logical fallacy must also be a delusion.

0 Replies

@JimmyJ,

JimmyJ wrote:

However, in the natural world our knowledge is limitless.

In the natural world, our knowledge is limited to its limits.

2 Replies

@JimmyJ,

JimmyJ wrote:

No evidence=waste of time (unless you want to use it to point out discrepancies to christians)

It's a waste of time for you.

0 Replies

@Ticomaya,

Ticomaya wrote:

JimmyJ wrote:
However, in the natural world our knowledge is limitless.

In the natural world, our knowledge is limited to its limits.

I love it, Ti!

0 Replies

@Ticomaya,

Quote:

In the natural world, our knowledge is limited to its limits.

What are the limits, Ticomaya? Define them for me and I will agree that our knowledge of the natural world has limits.

0 Replies

@JimmyJ,

I believe in it. I looking at myself now feel I'm so far away right now. As if in another time zone. I need to be slapped hard in the face with.. desire. of wanting to lead a different life for myself. That thing where I was born into this world at the wrong time because I don't belong.

1 Reply

@JimmyJ,

Quote:

I DO want to hear from people who don't "believe" in it, though. I want to know what your reasoning is. The evidence pretty much speaks for itself, so why do you deny it?

Is it not possible that evolution is denied in the same way that the bestial nature of our evacuation processes is denied by prettying up the bathroom with a range of decor.

A large number of pictures have been shown on TV of the interiors of the White House and Buckingham Palace but not a one has ever shown the dunny pot.

Lingerie serves a similar function. As does wallpaper.

You might be mistaking "not believing" with pretending "not believing". Believing in evolution accepts our bestiality but where does it lead us if we proudly profess it. Stendhal said that the Book of Etiquette was the most important publication of the 18th century.

Our dignity is at stake. As well as the dividends of a good half of our commercial enterprises. And millions of jobs.

Scatology is quite amusing but people who assume that they are the only ones who believe in evolution when it is only that they are prepared to proudly profess such an anti-social belief are pretty funny as well.

If one were to visit the bathrooms, the bedrooms, the dining rooms and the lounges of an average professed evolutionist one might have some difficulty in suppressing a guffaw festival.

1 Reply

@JimmyJ,

Read up Jim on Darwin's general physical condition and then imagine how romantic the settings for his 9 conceptions must have been. Especially the later ones.

0 Replies

@anonymously99,

I speak of the fact that I feel I was born into a world of people who refuse to accept change. Who deny the fact of maturity.
In other words it is as if majority of these people in this world feel they must not accept an individual has matured has changed. People most people like to believe they are always right about everything. They don't like to be proven wrong. They can't accept the fact that another person has changed.
Oh. So their past they continuously do? Example. Drugs. Say one abused drugs in the past was sent to prison etc etc. Time passes. They get a family. They claim they've changed. Are a changed individual. Yet there is one who says no they that person has not changed yet there is proof that person has changed. Their life now being the proof.
Must I continue or do you understand the point.

1 Reply

Why do people deny evolution?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know