"Believing" in Evolution

[Giant Blue Anteater]

Don't you guys think it is a little flawed to say that you "believe" in evolution when you say that you acknowledge and accept it as a biological fact? I do, at least.

For one, by saying that you "believe" in evolution, you are implying that it is nothing but a non-testable guess, the very basic definition of a belief. Another reason to cease saying that you "believe" in evolution is because you are giving creationists leverage by supporting their argument of evolution being a religion or requiring faith in order to try to nullify the debate.

After all, if you believe in evolution, you also believe in gravity, atoms, germs, and heliocentrialism. Of course, what I said is an oxymoron, since you don't really believe in theories, you acknowledge and accept them.

Now, the arguments I received when I made this point on another forum I go to were something like "People can use whatever words they like, thank you." and "I say 'believe' because it is not mean."

Well, my response to the first argument is that disregarding the proper definition of words opens you up to committing fallacies. My response to the second one would be sometimes, reality bites sometimes, and no matter how mean the proper use of words might sound to their beloved superstitions, it is too bad for them that they must take the truth.

Anybody agree with me?

 

[Aught3]

Yeah I pretty much agree, if you're going to call it a belief at least make it clear that it is a justified true belief as compared to creationism. I did try this once agreeing that evolution was a belief and that I had faith that evolution was correct - it didn't work out very well.

The best way to make the distinction is to insist on calling creationism a faith and evolution a fact or at least an evidence-derived scientific theory.

 

[Josan]

I always say - evolution isn't something you "belive" in or not, it's something you know or not

Maybe a tad arrogant? But it makes the point I'm trying to make perfectly.

 

[Aught3]

Maybe a tad arrogant?

No, it's not arrogant enough. Evolution is more than something you know, it is a fact whether you know it or not :lol:

 

[Squawk]

It all depends on the definitions of faith and belief, in my experience the least understood words in this entire debate.

I am perfectly happy to concede belief in evolution, but if someone attempts to equate this with faith they get slapped down hard.

FIrst of all evolution is a name given to an observed process so there is no belief required. It is simply a name given to an event. The usual debate point is the argument that evolution (neo-darwinian) is the explanation for the diversity of life on earth.

I happen to beleive this is the case, for the following reasons... then you can go into the evidence and explain why the belief is justified.

Science is a means of discovering approximations of the truth. It is not and has never claimed to be the truth. I tend to think that the use of the word accept, in the case of scientific theory, alludes to the idea that the current state of the theory is the truth. Of course that is not the intent of the statement, but that is how it reads.

Do you accept that the observable universe started at a singularity, or do you believe it based on evidence? I contend that I believe it based on evidence and that my belief will change in light of any new evidence that may be presented.

Belief and faith are often conflated. I find belief to be a useful term since I consider it to be an evidence based position, faith (in the sense of religious faith) is a position attained without evidence.

I believe evolution is the explanation for the diversity of life on earth, the meachanisms of which are being alighted upon by evolutionary biologists and paleontologists the world over.

 

[Nashy19]

When I say I believe in something I mean I believe it exists or happened.

If I said I believe in the theory of evolution that would mean I believe the theory exists, if I said I believed in evolution that would mean I believed evolution occurred. If I believe I left my keys downstairs on the table it's because I do believe I my keys are downstairs on the table, I have a reason to think that, it's not like I have blind faith in my keys. I do believe in gravity, germs, fruit and most of the other things you'd expect a normal person to believe in.

When people say they know something I find it obnoxious, especially when you are discussing that very thing.

"Do you believe _____?"
"No I KNOW _____"

I wouldn't want to talk with that person again.

 

[buzzausa]

I agree with most of what you said.
I think that we need to emphasize that a scientific theory is not a belief and doesn't require faith, which is belief held without (or in some cases in spite of) evidence.
That's why I personally don't say that I "believe" in evolution....to make that point.

On the other hand I tend to avoid saying that I "know" the truth.

I think Squawk made the best assessment: in science we find approximations of the truth. As our technology progresses and new or more accurate evidence is presented, our understanding increases and our approximations are refined.

 

[xman]

I'm with you Anteater and I don't give a rat's shit who is offended by the fact that I won't let them equivocate their way to equating creationism with evolution. Maybe I sometimes actually make them feel small for attempting such foolishness, but I take secret (amoral?) pleasure in humbling sometimes even humiliating the creatard moron. Now I have some creationist acquaintances and with them I will knowingly not use pejoratives, but I am no less forceful and insistent that we define our terms correctly. Once let them convince you that you can believe in evolution and it's suddenly 'just a theory'.

Don't go there.

 

[Light]

Given that I am, and many people are, laymen in biological sciences, I think it's perfectly acceptable to use the word 'believe'.

The alternative would require that I had read the literature or examined evidence, and I have done nothing of the sort.

 

[Giant Blue Anteater]

And another reason to stop saying "believe in" is because when putting creationists in their place, you're making yourself sound like you're trying to force them into believing in a doctrine (which evolution needless to say isn't), when what you're trying to do is getting them to open their eyes to reality.

As I stated in the original post, the fact that people constantly say that they "believe" in evolution is fodder for creationist arguments such as falsely claiming that "Evolution is a religious belief." Idiots like Kent Hovind have taken well advantage of this improper usage of terms to formulate this argument.

 

[borrofburi]

In practical life, when I'm told I "believe" in evolution I say that I believe in evolution just as much as I believe in maxwell's equations, and relativity (including both the mechanical and gravitational aspects of relativity).