Darwinism — Yeah, It’s a Thing

_{Barry Arrington

September 10, 2018

Intelligent Design}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

This chart should end once and for all the debate about the word “Darwinism.” But I doubt that it will, because if Darwinists were not so shameless, there would be no debate to begin with.

Comments

Read this: Darwinism- read the comments too. Then there is Wikipedia: Darwinism and Closet Darwinism, and definitionsET_{September 11, 2018
September
09
Sep
11
11
2018
08:29 AM
8
08
29
AM
PDT}

Whatever Bob. You aren't the most observant person and you are definitely clueless.ET_{September 11, 2018
September
09
Sep
11
11
2018
08:09 AM
8
08
09
AM
PDT}

ET - I guess that's a "no" to the question I asked, then.Bob O'H_{September 11, 2018
September
09
Sep
11
11
2018
06:48 AM
6
06
48
AM
PDT}

It's been said here, too, Bob. They say crap like "Darwin is dead and his theory has moved on so we are ignorant for saying "Darwinism""- even though they should have known what we were referring to. Larry Moran is famous for that because he thinks Darwinism is just natural selection.ET_{September 11, 2018
September
09
Sep
11
11
2018
06:25 AM
6
06
25
AM
PDT}

ET @ 12 - can you give me any specific examples? I do visit sites like that, but don't recall seeing anyone making that specific claim.Bob O'H_{September 11, 2018
September
09
Sep
11
11
2018
06:17 AM
6
06
17
AM
PDT}

Seversky needs to buy a dictionary and learn the difference between the words "some" and "all". :razz:ET_{September 11, 2018
September
09
Sep
11
11
2018
05:21 AM
5
05
21
AM
PDT}

Bob O'H:
but is there any evidence for this?
Visit TSZ, after the bar closes or any number of evo-run sites. They say we invented it to disparage both Darwin and evolution.ET_{September 11, 2018
September
09
Sep
11
11
2018
05:20 AM
5
05
20
AM
PDT}

From the Wikipedia entry on "Social Darwwinism:
The term Darwinism was coined by Thomas Henry Huxley in his March 1861 review of On the Origin of Species,[6] and by the 1870s it was used to describe a range of concepts of evolution or development, without any specific commitment to Charles Darwin's theory of natural selection.[7]
Seversky_{September 11, 2018
September
09
Sep
11
11
2018
04:33 AM
4
04
33
AM
PDT}

The legend to the chart says
Some critics have accused intelligent design (ID) proponents of inventing terms such as “Darwinism,” “Darwinist,” or even “Neo-Darwinism” (and similar variations).
but is there any evidence for this? One citation is given, but I can't find the full article. EN&V does give one quote from the correct page, but that doesn't have anyone saying what is claimed. This is puzzling, because I've never seen anyone claiming that design proponents (or even creationists!) invented the term "Darwinism".Bob O'H_{September 11, 2018
September
09
Sep
11
11
2018
02:52 AM
2
02
52
AM
PDT}

jdk:
And many use “Darwinist” as refer to someone who is a materialist also, which conflates metaphysics with biology.
Any evidence for that? Or do you think you just get to assert and not support?ET_{September 10, 2018
September
09
Sep
10
10
2018
08:21 PM
8
08
21
PM
PDT}

Lewontin in 3, 2, 1 ... :-)jdk_{September 10, 2018
September
09
Sep
10
10
2018
07:50 PM
7
07
50
PM
PDT}

And many use "Darwinist" as refer to someone who is a materialist also, which conflates metaphysics with biology.jdk_{September 10, 2018
September
09
Sep
10
10
2018
07:50 PM
7
07
50
PM
PDT}

Ambly:
It hardly matters, but there is a substantial difference in the way creationists of all ilks use the term ‘Darwinism’ and the way scientists use it.
Nonsense
Very often, creationists use it as a catch-all for pretty much all of evolutionary biology.
As does Dawkins and many other evos.
I’m sure this is a (possibly subconscious) choice to make a field of science seem like an ideology to be resisted.
I am sure that you are just spewing unsupportable nonsense
In science, we generally use “Darwinism” to differentiate Darwin’s theory of evolution from others, especially in terms of competing theories from the turn of the 20th century (Lamarckianism and Mendalism and all that).
And yet the evidence for Darwinism is always given in terms of Lamarckism- the evolution of eyes is a perfect example- it is always about the actual eyes and never about the genetics behind them.
Similarly, we usually use “Darwinian” to specifically refer to natural selection (or schools of evolutionary thought that focus on selection).
Exactly as everyone uses it
But it’s note clear the “Darwnism” scientists refer to is that same thing that creationsists are talking about.
Whatever- you have FAILed to make your case. In the end it doesn't matter as natural selection has proven to be impotent and Darwin's ideas are still untestable.ET_{September 10, 2018
September
09
Sep
10
10
2018
07:44 PM
7
07
44
PM
PDT}

It hardly matters, but there is a substantial difference in the way creationists of all ilks use the term 'Darwinism' and the way scientists use it. Very often, creationists use it as a catch-all for pretty much all of evolutionary biology. I'm sure this is a (possibly subconscious) choice to make a field of science seem like an ideology to be resisted. In science, we generally use "Darwinism" to differentiate Darwin's theory of evolution from others, especially in terms of competing theories from the turn of the 20th century (Lamarckianism and Mendalism and all that). Similarly, we usually use "Darwinian" to specifically refer to natural selection (or schools of evolutionary thought that focus on selection). To demonstrate,Genome Biology and Evolution has published ~450 papers since the start of 2017. The word "Darwinian" has appeared in 21 of those papers, and 15 of those 21 times it came in the phrase "Darwinian selection". So, yes, "Darwinism" is a thing. But it's note clear the "Darwnism" scientists refer to is that same thing that creationsists are talking about.Amblyrhynchus_{September 10, 2018
September
09
Sep
10
10
2018
07:34 PM
7
07
34
PM
PDT}

Seversky is clueless- evolutionists call it Darwinism. It's to honor the man. To be truthful it should be called nonsense. Would that be better, Seversky?ET_{September 10, 2018
September
09
Sep
10
10
2018
05:28 PM
5
05
28
PM
PDT}

It should be balanced with Paleyist and neo-Paleyist. Maybe even Mungian for those who want to be pigeon-holed with the other two.Seversky_{September 10, 2018
September
09
Sep
10
10
2018
05:15 PM
5
05
15
PM
PDT}

Bravo! Thank you for this post.Truth Will Set You Free_{September 10, 2018
September
09
Sep
10
10
2018
11:55 AM
11
11
55
AM
PDT}

Honest to Darwin!Mung_{September 10, 2018
September
09
Sep
10
10
2018
06:58 AM
6
06
58
AM
PDT}

Prev 1 2

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply