To those who don't know, Occam's Razor states that the simpliest answer is most likely the correct answer. This being said, I would like to propose a question of simplicity.
Creationism or Evolution? Which has the simpliest answers and why?
Best answer will go to the one who can provide the best response concerning his position (regardless of what I think). Please try not to bash either side during this. It is a standard debate. Who will come up with the best response? Good luck
2007-11-10 16:20:55 · 11 answers · asked by ChaRiaLer 4 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Apparently, some of you are confused. To take an example that was given, C=people on Earth. The A and B are different.
Creationism - A= God and B=he created
Evolution - A=starting point and B=millions of years of changes.
I am not trying to have a bashing the other processes. I am seeing who can provide the best response to position. No, I will not pick (like I said before) based on what I believe. This is going to be impartial. If you provide the best answer you will get the points for it. Again, good luck.
2007-11-10 16:53:25 · update #1
The complexities of the mind and the complexities of the universe, lets me know that we were not an accident of some big bang theory. Some greater force then an explosion had to have a hand in forming the world. If evolution was involved, why has people stayed the same for thousands of years. Why have we not continued to evolve. If as some say we evolved from apes, why have we halted in our evolutionary process. Or as others believe, from some big bang, that we started as some form of primordial ooze, or what ever they believe, I still ask why has the evolution process stopped? Shouldn't we be continuing to evolve in to some thing else, according to evolution? So a simple answer is, because we were created.
2007-11-10 16:33:01 · answer #1 · answered by jenx 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Creationism by evolution.
The creation was not an "instant" or fast act. The mention of days in the Bible is a metaphor. God took thousands of millions of years to work. After the life began over earth, the evolution, guided by God, did work to create, over a span of millions of years, all the species on our world. The first precursor cells did evolute into more and more complex beings, that with time, gave birth to all creatures in earth, including superior animal from which the humans did evolute. As evidence we have fossils and other remains.
That's why my idea of not creationism or evolution but creationism by evolution. It is my personal idea.
2007-11-10 16:49:00 · answer #2 · answered by roblesbigfish 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No you have absolutely no idea what Occam's Razor states. It is a way to determine which theory should be used between two equally correct theories. For example, if a+b=c and a+b*d/f+e=c, you would use a+b=c for the theory, but you can not use it to choose between two completely different ideas.
Therefore, your question can not be decided because there is no scientific theory behind Creationism.
2007-11-10 16:30:03 · answer #3 · answered by chlaxman17 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
creationism has the simplest explanations, in terms of word-count at least. unfortunately, they are either wrong or useless pseudo-explanations. parsimony is a useful criterion for evaluating theories but it is not the only criterion. also important are logical coherence and agreement with physical evidence. that is why ockham's razor is usually stated "*all else being equal*, the simplest explanation tends to be correct". all else is not equal, here.
2007-11-10 16:37:35 · answer #4 · answered by vorenhutz 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't really think Occam's Razor applies to "an invisible supernatural being must have done it!!".
Of course, let's say that we go with creationism - if every complex thing requires a more powerful creator, what created our creator? You can't just make that claim and then toss out "oh well our creator god was always there!". That's called special pleading, and it's a logical fallacy. If you're going to go with that line of reasoning, you'd better be prepared to take it all the way, without resorting to lame cop-outs!
2007-11-10 16:25:24 · answer #5 · answered by nobody important 5 · 2⤊ 3⤋
You misstated Occam's razor:
"Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate."
("Entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity.")
What is simpler? The universe? The universe and God?
Obviously, the universe. As there is no need for the "God" entity, by Occam's razor, you do not introduce it into the understanding of the universe.
Don't confuse Occam's razor with easy answers.
2007-11-10 17:00:40 · answer #6 · answered by novangelis 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Christianity is the simplest answer of course there is absolutely no evidence for it. It is also the wrong answer.So Occam's Razor is not always right. Best answer will be the one who agrees with you.
Kisses Betty B.
2007-11-10 16:31:53 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Evolution. It basically boils down to genetic mutations combined with natural selection.
Creationism sounds simple at first, but trying to reconcile it with the vast amounts of empirical evidence to the contrary usually requires a lot of mental gymnastics.
2007-11-10 16:30:08 · answer #8 · answered by crypto_the_unknown 4 · 3⤊ 2⤋
The answer "God did it" appears to be simple but that's misleading because God comes with the entire baggage of religion, its assorted myths, rules and the suspension of disbelief. If you add all of these together, Creatonism is far more complex than Evolution.
2007-11-10 16:24:25 · answer #9 · answered by Belzetot 5 · 2⤊ 4⤋
Evolution is the only argument from evidence. 'Nuf said.
Edit to Isaiah: How do you logically explain where every "creator" comes from?
2007-11-10 16:23:54 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋