Evolutionary Science, not Darwinism

[swamidass (S. Joshua Swamidass)]

@Eddie

I agree that evolution looks unguided an purposeless from a scientific point of view.

But those statements that I was referring to did not add “from a scientific point of view.”

Biology textbooks and NSCE is exclusievely “from a scientific point of view.” Are you suggesting we get stickers to put on biology textbooks that say “from a biologists point of view”? Really?

@Eddie

This was the impression generally conveyed about evolution until very recently. This was the impression that my generation – one generation at least older than yours – got from what “Science” said about origins.

Yup, and it is a totally wrong impression. Let’s correct it instead of repeating the same pointless arguments.

@Eddie

When the public presentation of evolution tended to be implicitly atheist or agnostic, many who believed in evolution and God felt the need to add “theistic” to distinguish their view from the usual meaning of the term. Their motive was sensible, at the time.

Maybe, but we face a new moment. Let’s stop reliving the traumas of the past.

@Eddie

What the textbooks say is not relevant.

It may not be relevant to advanced theorists, but it is relevant sociologically , since the textbooks, both high school and college, create a definite impression on the students who use them. Textbooks that spoke of evolution as “unguided and purposeless” were not helping the situation, and in fact, only added fuel the fire, giving fundamentalists and others even more reason to oppose science and scientists generally, which you and I agree was not a good reaction. So you shouldn’t dismiss what textbooks say. Overstatements in textbooks contribute to the religious culture war.

Just stop complaining about it, and we might be able to improve things. The approach you take, and that ID takes, actually makes movement forward much less likely.

Try just letting it go, and see what happens.