randman writes:
That's not entirely accurate. I believe evolution leads to atheism for a great many prominent evos, such as Wilson, and that evos latched onto Darwin, in part, because of that appeal.
Some might, some might not. Myself and Jar are examples of God-believing evos.
randman writes:
percy writes:
To Wilson and Watson the central significance of evolution is socio-cultural, not scientific. They are not making scientific statements.
That's just bull crap. They are scientists and asked to refer to the scientific significance of Darwin.
This is transcribed from the program:
| Rose: | Let me just start, tell me, put Darwin in perspective for us. When you think of the great scientific and intellectual contributions to humankind, what was the achievement of Charles Darwin? |
So we can see that Rose
*did not* ask about Darwin's scientific achievement, but more broadly his achievement. And Wilson replies:
| Wilson: | The achievement was not to present the idea of evolution, but to present the idea of evolution by random genetic change that was then sorted out by natural selection, by the environment. He had the origin of diversity of life as we know it on earth by autonomy, independent of any outside force. And this then put hamnity in a wholly different light, namely as potentially having arisen by this uncontrolled and undesigned process on our own on this planet independently. |
So Wilson names a scientific achievement and a socio-cultural achievement.
By the way, you can see in the above quote where your error in thinking they were discussing the origin of life comes from. He said the "origin of diversity of life", and you must have thought he said, "origin of life." We also find where you probably thought the word "autonomously" was used, since Wilson uses the word "autonomy". Sorry I didn't pick this up the first time I watched the show, but you said they used it when discussing the origin of life, which of course they never did.
The fact they perhaps can't see straight enough to know the difference between science and social and religious issues is indicative of many evos, and that's the whole point of the thread.
I think you just like to conclude that anyone who's not you is stupid. Obviously Watson and Wilson are aware of the distinction between science and religion. A good part of the discussion was devoted to it.
randman writes:
percy writes:
You deny the status of Christianity to any Christian who professes a view different than your own.
Well, this is not Christmas cheer, but you are just being a flat out liar here, Percy.
Ah, I see. When you see something a certain way, you're an astute judge of the human condition. When someone else see's something a different certain way, they're lying.
I questioned jar, not because he differed from me, but because of the way he inserts the claim he was "a Christian" all the time on science threads when there is no reason to do so...
Because your scientific beliefs are rooted in fundamentalist orthodoxy, it seems an important point that not all Christians believe as you do, and that not all Christians reach the same conclusions you do.
--Percy
™ Version 4.2
