CORRECTED...
Posted by anyman on Jun 22, 2002 at 09:02
(61.183.176.13)Re: you have perhaps led a sheltered life... (I. S.)
The theory of Christianity
Jesus is the way to salvation. Love your neighbor as yourself.
This theory has been used as justification by countless depraved individuals for genocide and the worst forms of torture.
The theory of evolution
Populations change over successive generations, as a result of natural selection acting on the genetic variation among individuals, and resulting in the development of new species.
This theory has been used as justification by countless depraved individuals for genocide and the worst forms of torture.
See the connection? The way people use a theory to justify themselves has nothing to do with the inherent value of the theory itself. Pure Christianity has nothing to do with killing or torturing people. Pure evolution has nothing to do with killing or torturing people.sure...and you at least part right...any philosophy can be abused and misused
but then folks like you and i often say some of the same things but mean things that are pretty far apart from one another
your definition of evolution is pretty much like my definition of design (and design involving the kind of highly specific complex information in the biological and cosmological realm in my estimation necessarily the product of intelligent mind...hence a designer...thus a creator)...but i would use different words, ie there is no clear working definition of species...and i would add some of the primary factors such as environmental stimuli and isolation
i think a better summation of the evolutionary position is survival of the fittest and you are essentially a product of your genes...and aside from the fact that he is wrong, dawkins is at least a little bit more consistent with the logical conclusions of evolutionary philosophy when he speaks of selfish genes
most in the social sciences try to isolate and reject the logical ends of darwinian evolutionary philosophy in the psychological and social realm while still accepting it in the biological and cosmological realm...but there are a few like daniel dennet and peter singer that are more realistic and at least in what they teach (though not the way they live) more consistent with the logical conclusions of evolutionary philosophy
in short, i'd really like to respond to your post more comprehensively but i would need to rearrange your apples and oranges quite a bit and throw in lots of relevant asides to give it the kind of treatment it deserves...and i just don't have that kind of time
who knows, maybe this post of yours will provide seed for two or three different books in the future :-)
a major part of the problem is that we are viewing these concepts for very different perspectives
at any rate, i'm thankful you took the time to share your thoughts...