I must say that your approach is novel! You'd have to have a diety for it to be a religion, and I don't think it has one... Darwin doesn't count :). He was a pretty religious guy who had a hard time presenting his evidence of natural selection. You also can't call it a cult because it doesn't worship a person.
On the other hand, evolution is an idea that is embraced by many people, although not really as a way to live your life. I think it wouldn't even be thought of as a religion unless it was pitted against people with religious beliefs. It wouldn't be thought of as a religion any more than say, the idea that it is good to eat 5 servings (or whatever) of fruits and veggies a day. It's just what major religious belief it goes against that is partly defining what it is.
Hmm, in the mirriam-webster's diciotnary online, I found this tidbit...
4: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith
Maybe you can work with that...
By the way, I firmly believe in evolution, but I like that you are thinking about it. Don't take what the evolutionists or the creationists (intellegent design included) for fact, figure it out on your own.
2007-03-12 08:29:31
·
answer #1
·
answered by Miss Vida 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
If evolution is a religion, then so is every thing else in science ... because the theory of evolution uses exactly the same methods and logical structure.
For example:
Science makes falsifiable predictions. Religion doesn't. Does evolution make falsifiable predictions? Yes. It predicted that all of life would have the same underlying mechanism for inheritance. Evolution was proposed long before the discovery of DNA. If some organisms were found to have right-handed DNA and some left-handed DNA (spiraling to the right and left), then this would have disproved evolution by showing that those organisms could not have had a common ancestor.
Science can be verified with experiments and observations. Religion cannot. Can evolution be verified with experiments and observations? Yes. For example, the fact that you need a new flu shot every year is evidence of evolution (the flu viruses have evolved to be resistant to last-year's shot). Your big toe is evidence of evolution (it has the same number of bones (knuckles) as your thumb, as well as a different muscles, nerves, and structure than your other toes ... all of which reveal that it was once used for grasping with the feet). Add to that all the fossil evidence, genetic evidence, molecular evidence (DNA), embyology (gill slits in mammals, tails in humans, leg buds in dolphin embryos), physiology (appendix, wisdom teeth, whale hips and leg bones, snake leg buds), biogeography (the locations of classes of animals on the planet),etc. etc. There are a lot of web sites that just deny this evidence ... but you need to study this a lot before you decide who is right or wrong.
Science does not resort to supernatural explanations. Religion does. Does evolution resort to supernatural explanations? No. Every step in the evolutionary explanation uses natural laws.
Now, some people might say that "naturalism" is a religion. That is a fair argument. But it is NOT fair to separate evolution and science this way ... as if to say that evolution is "naturalism" and science is not "naturalism."
2007-03-12 15:26:47
·
answer #2
·
answered by secretsauce 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
Well, I'd start by defining your terms - what is a "science", and what constitutes a "religion"? What characteristics do each of these have that make it a unique category? Then, list as many characteristics as you can think of about 'evolution', and see how much the lists overlap. It might help to talk to people who work or live in the areas concerned to help with your definitions - a Sunni Muslim's definition of Southern Baptist religion might be somewhat inaccurate, and so also might a theoretical physicist's definition of evolution. Try to be as accurate as possible - building a thesis on incomplete or inaccurate information is like a man building a house on sand..
2007-03-12 09:03:01
·
answer #3
·
answered by John R 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
Evolution is a "Scientific theory", which means that each time a scientist finds a problem with it, and amendment to the theory is worked out, and when peer-reviewed and accepted by other scientists, the amended theory is adopted. So, "no", evolution is as FAR from being a "religion" as it can be! Religion is founded in dogma and faith. Reason and logic have no place in theology, just as pure logic has no place in religion. Religion absolutely requires that you take certain things on "faith alone", with subjecting them to too much scrutiny.
2007-03-12 13:36:10
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
its actually a scientific theory. Religious people say that it's a substitution for religion, but that's not true. You can still be catholic or Jewish or Muslem or w/e and belive in the theory of evolution, Theresfore, the thoery itself is not a religion.
2007-03-12 08:25:58
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
the fossil and DNA record. i would say it's pretty obvious. you can even see the evolutionary process on a macroscopic scale if you watch somebody learning a task they seem to streamline and automate certain processes. that's a form of evolution.
2007-03-12 08:24:28
·
answer #6
·
answered by ReelFreak 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
In arithmetic axioms are merely assumed real for the objective of seeing what effects from that assumption. there is not any assumption made in line with observations of the real worldwide. neither is there any assumption that those axioms are themselves real in any experience. arithmetic is instead truly those needed truths of the form "If X then Y" the place X consists of gadgets of axioms and Y consists of needed conclusions in line with those axioms. traditionally The church fought for years against non-euclidean geometry. plenty so as that the creation of non-euclidean geometry replaced into at the back of schedule by way of fact mathematicians (specifically Gauss ) feared for his or her saftey.
2016-12-14 17:17:39
·
answer #7
·
answered by raper 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Evolution is indeed RELIGION, there are many assumptions, based on this and none can be proven! Not one single form, save micro which should really be adaptation:
Finally, someone who also thinks it is a religion......
Will you marry me
2007-03-14 11:16:19
·
answer #8
·
answered by Chris 3
·
0⤊
2⤋
evolution isnt a religion.
2007-03-12 08:23:56
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋