RE: Are there things that don't evolve?

Hello Debbie,
   
  Nice to 'meet' you at ASA! Perhaps, after several people shared their knowledge about thermodynamics and entropy, you would be willing now to help put the thread back on track.
   
  Can you give an example or examples of things that don't evolve? Are there things that don't evolve?
   
  Recently, we have had a few more contributions about things that *do* evolve.
   
  "'Evolution' in the context of science courses usually involves only organic evolution. However, it should be clear to all that language evolves." - Dave Siemens
   
  But there is still a seeming reluctance to discuss things that don't evolve, perhaps due to the distasteful idea of anti-evolutionism in American science and religion discourse. Clearly when Ted Davis says evolution functions as a 'theory of everything,' he is not endorsing Dawkin's atheism. Perhaps it would help if Ted himself would address the topic and discover if he could come up with an example of something, anything that doesn't evolve? Or is there really nothing that doesn't evolve?
   
  At the same time, David Opderbeck claims TE's don't advocate evolution as a 'theory of everything' because evolution "speaks only to observable natural mechanisms." Perhaps evolution should be considered as only a naturalistic phenomenon. Maybe non-natural (e.g. cultural, social, ethical) or non-physical things, as was suggested earlier, are examples of things that don't evolve? How might it help us to distinguish evolution from mere change - or are they functionally equivalent synonyms?
   
  David writes: "perhaps you can say everything "evolves" if by "evolves" you just mean "changes." Even here I think we'd have to exclude God from this, unless one wants to endorse open theism. But if we use "evolves" that broadly, it doesn't seem to be a meaningful term anymore."
   
  JimA used the phrase 'change by complication' - in that case, could a person suggest that 'change by simplification' is an example of something that has changed, but not evolved?
   
   
  Regards,
   
  Gregory Arago

  Debbie Mann <deborahjmann@insightbb.com> wrote:
    Thank you for all your responses. Wayne, I like your comments about 'why do things evolve upward?'. In the same thought process as 'The Clockmaker' argument, it seems totally illogical that they do - unless there is a 'Programmer'. ... It just doesn't make sense to me that things evolve upward unless God is directing things.
...
I could accept downward diversification with the natural selection of traits in beings that were less advanced than the master parent race.
   
  Debbie Mann
(765) 477-1776

                
---------------------------------
Make Yahoo! Canada your Homepage Yahoo! Canada Homepage
Received on Sat Mar 25 20:07:24 2006