Why do evolutionists get upset when their theory is called into question?

Question

I am looking for a psychological viewpoint.

Love Jack

Answer 1

Evolution is a means that people have made to deny questions. Evolution denies questions since there is no cause for anything, its all randomness. People who love evolution like the fact that they don't have to worry about deep issues anymore since those issues are moot to them.

"Why does anything exist?" Moot question, everything exists because it does. All things are random chance, so there is no cause.
"What is my purpose?" Moot question. You have no purpose, all life is random chance.
"Why do things happen the way they do?" Moot question. There is no cause, all things are random chance. The laws of the universe exist because of random chance.

Pretty much any "why" question is moot to an evolutionist since there is no single cause.

Evolution is a crutch to evade reality. They never have to deal with the real issues of life or answer questions pertaining to morality.
Truthfully, while some try and look at psychology from an evolutionary perspective, that's against their own system. Evolution states that there is no real reason, its just random.

Concluding; evolutionists hate when their theory is called just that instead of fact because it would force them to look at reality and have to deal with it, which terrifies them. They would rather lie, put pressure on people, and dodge than they would take a look at the truth.

EDIT!
Case in point for the entire use of the word "upset." There are two people who posted comments to the effect that the question is dumb, and there are two thumbs down on people who actually answered the question.

Answer 2

I think most people are more comfortable when they think they understand something than when they think they don't understand it. When someone challenges something a person believes they understand, it can therefore be unsettling.

Open-minded and intelligent people, however, will consider alternate views if those views are supported by credible facts. I think most mainstream scientists (which I think is whom you're referring to with the term "evolutionists") are open-minded and intelligent and would seriously consider an alternate theory if one was presented which was logical, scientifically-sound, and provided a plausible explanation for at least as many known phenomena as the current explanation. Over the years, many theories have been replaced by later theories that better explain things that happen, so I think history has proven that overall scientists are willing to abandon previously-held beliefs when a new theory is shown to better explain how things work.

What scientists won't accept - and often get annoyed by - are theories that are purely religion-based, have little or no basis in science or even contradict scientifically-proven facts, and don't even come close to rationally explaining the known phenomena that evolution explains.

Those who espouse such theories generally cite information written by religiously-significant people from thousands of years ago as "proof" of their theory, however people of that time believed that Earth was flat, people would fall off of it if they went to the end, that the sun and stars orbited Earth, and many other things that we now know to be completely wrong. Given that track record, it's not surprising to me that rational people would not believe that everything else those same people wrote is 100% accurate without even questioning it.

I suspect that most of the "evolutionists" that get upset are not so much upset about the theory being questioned, but more about it being dismissed by people who are not willing to seriously consider evolution or any theory other than those put forth by people thousands of years ago that have been proven to have very little scientific credibility.

Answer 3

Well, technically it's not "our" theory, it's a scientific theory and actually belongs to the scientists that have contributed to it. that said it's pretty much public information and I doubt anyone would try to claim private ownership over it.

Anyway...

The reason we get all pis*y about people ranting about how incorrect evolution is, is because these people tend to either not have a clue about what they're talking about or they have an agenda and purposely misquote, misrepresent data and blatantly lie about evolution and/or "rival theories" to support their claims. Usually the second types are the ones confusing the first type.

Basically, if a group of people went around trying to convince everyone that the Moon was made of cheese, and lied about "other theories", that moon rocks were all fake, that the moon landing never happened or was covered up because the US government didn't want to admit to the cheese, and misquoted several scientists to support their claim, wouldn't you get a little annoyed, especially if they tried to get it taught in school science classes? How about if cheesists constantly told "moonrockists" that they were going to Hell for believing that God would create the moon of anything besides cheese? Or if different factions of cheesists existed that argued over what kind of cheese it was made of?

Answer 4

I don't think upset is the right term. Personally I'm saddened by the ignorance that is used to try to convince people that "Intelligent design" is an actual theory.

Answer 5

No offense..but if you're an atheist, why are so determined to prove "evolutionists" wrong?

Answer 6

Same reason creationists get upset when theirs is called into question.

People get upset -- that's what they do. If we didn't get upset, our beliefs wouldn't be worth having.

Answer 7

Because to them it is not a theory it's actually a fact so to question their "beliefs" is offensive I'm assuming

Answer 8

Because they have faith that evolution is based on fact and not on theory. Evolution has become a religion to attack other religions.