Can an evolutionist please tell me the difference between a "scientific theory" and a "scientific law"

Question

If your wondering why I target evolutionists, it is because this guy asked, "Could a creationist please tell me the difference between a 'theory' and a 'scientific theory.'"

Answer 1

'Evolutionist' is a misleading term. I'm a scientist who accepts evolution, so I'll give it a shot.

A scientific law, such as Newton's laws, Kepler's laws, or Ohm's law, is a statement (often mathamatical) to describe a physical system. If you put a body in orbit, this is what happens. If you hook up a series of resistors, this is what happens. It makes no attempt to explain, it just states the expected outcome.

A scientific theory does the explaining. It tells you why you expect that outcome. Theories are not promoted to facts - they are two different things. Theories CONTAIN facts and laws and observations. The theory is the master folder you put everything else in.

A theory doesn't mean 'we're not sure' or 'this might not be true'. Theories are the best ways we have to describe the universe.

Answer 2

The "evolution isn't a law" argument is one of the silliest. If all of us evolutionists on the science side were so concerned about mere language, why wouldn't we just have a conference and upgrade evolution to a law? This would be a great idea if only evolution was actually one big scam.

I don't think anyone else has mentioned it, but in addition to laws and theories there are also facts. Fact: two massive bodies are attracted to each other; Law: newton's laws of motion; Theory: Einsteins "theory" of gravity.

In evolutionary theory, it is considered a *fact* that evolution did and does occur and that all life originated from a single common ancestor. There are zero - zip, nada, none - serious biologists who think otherwise. You can find more physics PhDs who dispute gravity than you can biologist PhDs that dispute common descent.

The theory part of evolutionary theory is exactly how evolution took place, the various natural forces that acted upon life to make it go where it needed to go. For example, Darwin's original ideas of natural selection. Since Darwin's original ideas, 150 years ago, much is now known about what other processes are involved. Genetics, for example, has opened up a whole new window into how random mutation happens.

Answer 3

If "evolutionists" actually existed they could. Since nobody religiously believes in evolution, I'll tell you the difference:

A theory is a peer reviewed hypothesis with substantial evidence to back it up. A theory may be proven wrong and corrected at any time by newly reviewed evidence.

A scientific law is a proven reality where we know that something _will_ happen based on these laws. For example, the basics of the law of gravity is that (in a standard terrestrial situation) what goes up must come down.

Now, the thing is that laws are different to theories. Firstly theories DO NOT get promoted to laws when they are proven 100% because nothing can be proven 100%. Laws are simply observed realities, theories on the other hand are the explanations of how and why things are/happen.

For example, the law of gravity above does not explain why things fall down to Earth, the theory of gravity does just that. The theory of gravity dictates that mass attracts mass and larger bodies of mass attract more than smaller bodies.

I hope that helps you get over this intellectual hurdle. To be fair, it's not difficult to comprihend, I fear that people like yourself make these things difficult for yourself in attempt to disregard them.

Answer 4

I am "that guy" who asked the question. I asked it as many creationists seem to confuse the term 'theory' and the term 'scientific theory'

Anyway as to your question :

Scientific theory :

In scientific usage, a theory does not mean an unsubstantiated guess or hunch, as it can in everyday speech. A theory is a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a related set of natural or social phenomena. It originates from or is supported by experimental evidence (see scientific method). In this sense, a theory is a systematic and formalized expression of all previous observations that is predictive, logical and testable. In principle, scientific theories are always tentative, and subject to corrections or inclusion in a yet wider theory. Commonly, a large number of more specific hypotheses may be logically bound together by just one or two theories. As a general rule for use of the term, theories tend to deal with much broader sets of universals than do hypotheses, which ordinarily deal with much more specific sets of phenomena or specific applications of a theory.

Scientific law :

scientific law, or empirical law, or empirical generalisation is a law-like statement that generalises across a set of conditions (e.g. time, countries, temperatures). To be accorded law-like status a wide variety of these conditions should be known, i.e. the law has a well documented history of successful replication and extension to new conditions. Ideally boundary conditions, where the law fails, should also be known.

A scientific law concerns the physical or social world, it therefore must have empirical content and therefore be capable of testing and potentially falsifiable. Analytic statements that are true or false by logic alone are not scientific laws, though may feature as part of scientific theories.

The concept of a scientific law is closely related to the concept of a scientific theory. In practice the terms are often interchanagable, though scientific theory can be a systematically integrated set of related scientific laws that leads to greater insight and further predictions than the laws alone would.

The term "scientific law" is traditionally associated with the natural sciences and hence the term is used interchangably with the term physical laws. The biological sciences also have scientific laws, such as Mendelian inheritance and the Hardy-Weinberg principle found in genetics. The social sciences also contain scientific laws


I presume you were asking this question in the hope of embarassing some so called "evolutionists" but in fact you have ended up embarassing yourself as you obviously do not understand the terms "scientific theory" and "scientific law" yourself. you really should research these things first.

By the way, what is an "evolutionist" anyway ?

Am I also a "gravitationalist" because I believe in the "theory" of gravity too ?


And for the record, not one creationist was able to explain the difference between a theory and a scientific theory. I got lots of excellent definitions of theory but strangely they avoided defining a scientific theory.

Answer 5

Well, I cheated. I had to look it up. But I always cringed a bit when people would say that "Evolution is a theory that is not yet a law". Something about that statement just reeks: that a theory is by definition unfinished while a law is not.

This gentleman answers the question quite well:

---
Regardless of which definitions one uses to distinguish between a law and a theory, scientists would agree that a theory is NOT a "transitory law, a law in waiting". There is NO hierarchy being implied by scientists who use these words. That is, a law is neither "better than" nor "above" a theory. From this view, laws and theories "do" different things and have different roles to play in science.
---

Answer 6

A scientific law, or empirical law, or empirical generalisation is a law-like statement that generalises across a set of conditions (e.g. time, countries, temperatures). To be accorded law-like status a wide variety of these conditions should be known, i.e. the law has a well documented history of successful replication and extension to new conditions. Ideally boundary conditions, where the law fails, should also be known.

A scientific law concerns the physical or social world, it therefore must have empirical content and therefore be capable of testing and potentially falsifiable. Analytic statements that are true or false by logic alone are not scientific laws, though may feature as part of scientific theories.

A scientific theory is a mathematical or logical explanation, or a testable model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise falsified through empirical observation.

The concept of a scientific law is closely related to the concept of a scientific theory. In practice the terms are often interchangable, though scientific theory can be a systematically integrated set of related scientific laws that leads to greater insight and further predictions than the laws alone would.

Answer 7

A scientific law is a generalization of observed data.

A scientific theory is an explanation of scientific laws and which can point a direction for new research. When a theory covers a large field of science in its explanations (eg Evolution) then it can be said to be fact. But new research can cause slight changes in the details of a theory without it being disproved.

Answer 8

A scientific law, or empirical law, or empirical generalisation is a law-like statement that generalises across a set of conditions (e.g. time, countries, temperatures). To be accorded law-like status a wide variety of these conditions should be known, i.e. the law has a well documented history of successful replication and extension to new conditions. Ideally boundary conditions, where the law fails, should also be known.
A scientific law concerns the physical or social world, it therefore must have empirical content and therefore be capable of testing and potentially falsifiable. Analytic statements that are true or false by logic alone are not scientific laws, though may feature as part of scientific theories.

In science, a theory is a mathematical or logical explanation, or a testable model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise falsified through empirical observation. It follows from this that for scientists "theory" and "fact" do not necessarily stand in opposition.

Answer 9

A theory is "a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena" [Random House American College Dictionary]. The term does not imply tentativeness or lack of certainty. For instance Human Sexual Reproduction is the theory that explains where babies come from.

A law is a statement describing a relationship observed to be invariable between or among phenomena for all cases in which the specified conditions are met.

Theories and laws are two entirely different types of things. One does not become the other.

Answer 10

evolution is a lot of hypothesis mixed with some evidence. I can believe some of it but don't believe all of it. I wouldn't recommend believing all you hear either. Instead become one who investigates it. But then again most people when they investigate have an objective that often clouds their view. This also can cloud scientist conclusions and leads them to conclude things that are only possible but not necessarily so. However there is something to it. For example Bacteria can become super bugs by adapting. People have adapted to very high climates. But do you think that explains where life came from? More than likely not. As a christian however I have also considered that God make create on a method similar to that. For instance if he tweaked Genes in certain creatures on purpose how would we know. We would think it just happened. It might drastically increase the chances of life on earth compared to it just randomly happening. Also in the Bible in Genesis either chapter 2 or 6 it talks about God creating the animals. Its says he created them after their likeness and after their kind. Who are they? Were they creatures that preceded the set that came later. Anyways I don't presume to know all the facts and I don't believe anyone else who thinks they know all the facts either. Everything needs to be taken and measured respectively.