Re: Evolve/Create (posted for G. Englemann)

From
Date
Reply-To
Subject: Re: Evolve/Create
To: paleonet-owner@nhm.ac.uk
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 15:12:59 -0600 (CST)
From: George Engelmann <engelman@cwis.unomaha.edu>
Status: O

Jere Lipps wrote:

> .......... between 43 and 48% of
> ALL Americans believe in the literal interpretation of the bible.  Some 95%
> believe in GOD.  Many of my classes of freshmen here at Berkeley (entering
> average GPA = A) believe all of it too.
>
>
The problem isn't WHAT they believe so much as the notion that it is
necessary to have a belief system. Too many people see science as just an
alternative belief system rather than a system of free, critical inquiry into
propositions that we deliberately choose not to accept as beliefs, at least
while they are being investigated. Referring back to the previous discussion,
I don't think it is useful to get bogged down in distinguishing between
hypotheses and theories. In fact, I think such distinctions are arbitrary,
based on degree of complexity or history of testing, and not an important
philosophical distinction. Rather, the point to challenge when someone says
that evolution is just a hypothesis, is that it is described as JUST a
hypothesis. The implication is that science provides access to more certain
knowledge and that evolutionary theory is therefore weaker, more likely to be
false than some other scientific knowledge. It is the essence of science that
hypotheses remain uncertain indefinitely. Gravitation is "just" a hypothesis.
A well tested and corroborated hypothesis, a theory if you wish, may prove so
reliable in its predictions that we treat it as if it were true. As individuals
we may even believe it. Beliefs are practical conveniences, perhaps
necessities, for daily existence. They allow us to act on the basis of our
expectations. But belief is the death of science. The problem with beliefs is
not that they are not true, but that they are not open to question.
Sorry to be so long.
GFEngelmann
engelman@unomaha.edu