Re: Definitions

From: Brian D Harper (bharper@postbox.acs.ohio-state.edu)
Date: Mon Feb 28 2000 - 01:56:54 EST

  • Next message: Susan Brassfield: "Re: Definitions"

    At 10:07 PM 2/25/00 -0500, you wrote:
    >As one who has been sampling this site for some time I am truly fascinated
    >by the wide range of positions stated ... and the reason and logic (or
    >lack thereof) offered in the various presentations.

    Welcome to the list.

    >While there are frequent references to the importance of proper
    >"definitions" in many of the claimed assertions ... I am disappointed by
    >the ambiguousness in definitions actually supplied. From past experience
    >I've found the great bulk (90%+?) of all disagreement in the
    >creation/evolution controversy is more reflective of poor semantics
    >(imprecise, careless, selective, deceptive definitions) than on actual
    >scientific differences. This also appears to be the case in many of the
    >messages published here.

    This is my own experience as well. I am not optimistic that we will ever
    arrive at any single definition
    of evolution that everyone will be happy with. The reason is, I believe,
    that there are many theories and
    many mechanisms of evolution. People who support a particular mechanism or
    theory will probably find
    a particular definition which brings out these preferences. I believe this
    to be unavoidable, what one has
    to strive to do is understand what is meant.

    In my view, the essential point to recognize when looking at definitions is
    whether one is talking about
    (a) the historical phenomena of evolution itself or (b) a theory that
    attempts explain this phenomena.
    I believe a common confusion is to take difficulties with (b) as posing
    problems for (a).

    I can remember very well when I was a creationist. What I was interested in
    primarily was (a).
    Has evolution occurred or has it not? With this in mind let me put forward
    a description of what
    is meant by (a). This has to be done before getting to (b), IMHO. To this
    end let me quote from
    a really great book that I just finished reading. This book is highly
    recommended. Has to be
    one of the best books written on the TE position (of course, the book deals
    with a lot more than
    that). Here's the quote:

    # "The first meaning of evolution is history, specifically a living natural
    history in which the
    # roots of the present are found in the past. The process of evolution, in
    this sense, describes
    # a natural history shaped by descent with modification. It means that the
    past was characterized
    # by a process in which present-day species can be traced back to similar,
    but distinctly different,
    # ancestors. And it means that as we move backwards in time, as we pick up
    more of the bits and
    # pieces of that historical record, we find a diversity of life that is
    increasingly different from the life
    # we know and see today. This is, of course, an absolutely accurate
    description of what we know
    # of life's past on this planet." -- Kenneth R Miller <Finding Darwin's
    God> Cliff Street Books
    # 1999, p. 53

    Brian Harper | "If you don't understand
    Associate Professor | something and want to
    Applied Mechanics | sound profound, use the
    The Ohio State University | word 'entropy'"
                                  | -- Morrowitz



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Feb 27 2000 - 22:52:33 EST