# The “Evolutionary Worldview”

**URL:** <https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-evolutionary-worldview/10524>\
**Category:** Side Conversation\
**Created:** [April 26, 2020, 2:22pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-evolutionary-worldview/10524 "2020-04-26T14:22:52Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 20\
**Page:** 4

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Roy](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/roy/32/3799_2.png) [@Roy](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Roy)\
**Post date:** [April 27, 2020, 1:00pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-evolutionary-worldview/10524/64 "2020-04-27T13:00:08Z")

</div>

> [@PDPrice](#):
>
> > [@Roy](#):
> >
> > Creation is correct, but evolution is believed to be correct: _In_ consistent. God made us so that we would see reality as it is, but instead (some) people come to false conclusions about reality.
> > 
> > There are ways around that last problem (the fall, etc), but they all undermine PDPrice’s assumptions. The existence of people who disagree with him refutes his argument.
> 
> This is bizarre. The existence of people who refuse to submit to God proves God does not exist? Or the Bible is wrong? I really don’t follow this.

Obviously not. It’s also obvious that you’re hiding behind the excuse that anyone who disagrees with you must have rejected something they know to be true and consequently be unable to see other things that you think are truths.

> [@](#):
>
> The condition we find ourselves in today, with creation being correct and evolution believed to be correct, is exactly what the Bible prophesied would happen (or Peter, to be specific) in 2 Peter 3. This “problem” you speak of is actually a confirmation of biblical prophecy going back 2000 years.

No it isn’t. 2 Peter 3 is about the second coming of Jesus, not about evolution.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![T.j\_Runyon](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/t.j_runyon/32/9662_2.png) [@T.j\_Runyon](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/T.j_Runyon)\
**Post date:** [April 27, 2020, 1:06pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-evolutionary-worldview/10524/65 "2020-04-27T13:06:02Z")

</div>

> [@PDPrice](#):
>
> There is no reason to believe that evolution would, or could, produce creatures with these features you describe.

Yes there is. Like I said there is no way in hell our species could survive for the length of time it has in the type of rapidily changing environments we have if our cognitive falculties weren’t mostly reliable. Yes, there are some false beliefs that could aid in survival but they are a small subset of all false beliefs. Can we hundred percent know for a fact our faculties are reliable? No. And neither can you. Can you show me that you aren’t actually in a padded room right now and that you aren’t hallucinating all of this? No. But we can rely on probabilities and probability says our cognitive faculties are more likely to be reliable with what we know about human history.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Roy](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/roy/32/3799_2.png) [@Roy](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Roy)\
**Post date:** [April 27, 2020, 1:15pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-evolutionary-worldview/10524/66 "2020-04-27T13:15:33Z")

</div>

> [@PDPrice](#):
>
> > [@Roy](#):
> >
> > No it doesn’t. You have been lied to.
> 
> I do my own research. I know I haven’t been lied to, because I track these things back to their source.

You can’t track to the source something that you haven’t been told about, or have been told doesn’t exist.

But why should I believe you track things to their source? You didn’t track the Lewontin quote to its [source](https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1997/01/09/billions-and-billions-of-demons/), you cited a creationist article instead.

> [@](#):
>
> Everything I posted there is accurate. If you don’t realize that, perhaps it is you who have been lied to.

I know I’ve been lied to. I’ve been lied to by creationists and IDers. Thousands and thousands of times. That’s why I know you’ve been lied to as well.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![PDPrice](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/pdprice/32/6024_2.png) [@PDPrice](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/PDPrice)\
**Post date:** [April 27, 2020, 1:21pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-evolutionary-worldview/10524/67 "2020-04-27T13:21:21Z")

</div>

> [@Rumraket](#):
>
> Those reasons are not supposed to serve as justifications for the ability to trust our reasoning(that can’t be done, they have to be assumed for everyone, both you and me), but there are in fact such reasons, such as the straightforward idea that making decisions on accurate information is better than inaccurate information.

Accurate information is not needed for survival. Effective information is needed, if any information at all. What information do bacteria possess? Yet, bacteria are more evolutionarily successful than humans. What matters is that you believe what happens to allow you to survive. Nothing more. The ability to grasp lofty abstract notions like “truth” is a luxury your worldview simply cannot reasonably accommodate

> [@Rumraket](#):
>
> Even if evolution was “primarily” due to genetic drift, and “to a lesser extent” due to selection(it isn’t clear what measure of quantity you use to arrive at these proportions), and even if mutations were somehow “directional and non-random”(whatever you mean by that), it simply doesn’t follow that “the whole thing” is a sham.

What follows is that it’s an intellectually bankrupt worldview based upon mythology. Mutations are not the cause of life or complexity. They are the enemy of it.

> That statement implies a circular argument. In your “worldview”, that is to say _if we join you in making your assumptions_ , it makes sense to make your assumptions. Well congratulations.

You have not grasped my argument. I understand it’s circular. Every worldview is circular with respect to starting assumptions. That is indeed unavoidable.

My argument goes further than this. My argument is that we can draw an inference from the fact that we do in fact have to assume our senses are reliable and our ability to reason is effective. We need a worldview that accommodates this. Atheism and materialism cannot. They simply start with a blind leap and they never get beyond that blind leap. Evolution cannot reliably be expected to grant us truth knowledge. The fact that we apparently have the abilities we must assume we do have points to our Creator. All knowledge, and all truth, points to God. Without God, you must become like Pontius Pilate, and say in defeat, “What is truth?”

> Look, I think you should take a break because you’ve been reduced to blatant incoherence. The things you are saying are so nonsensical you can’t even accurately describe your own position.

This is what it looks like when somebody gets upset and resorts to namecalling instead of logical argumentation.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![PDPrice](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/pdprice/32/6024_2.png) [@PDPrice](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/PDPrice)\
**Post date:** [April 27, 2020, 1:22pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-evolutionary-worldview/10524/68 "2020-04-27T13:22:33Z")

</div>

> [@Roy](#):
>
> No it isn’t. 2 Peter 3 is about the second coming of Jesus, not about evolution.

It’s actually about both. It’s about scoffers who deliberately overlook creation and the flood, appealing instead to uniformitarian thinking, and on the basis of this they reject the second coming.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![T.j\_Runyon](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/t.j_runyon/32/9662_2.png) [@T.j\_Runyon](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/T.j_Runyon)\
**Post date:** [April 27, 2020, 1:23pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-evolutionary-worldview/10524/69 "2020-04-27T13:23:39Z")

</div>

> [@PDPrice](#):
>
> What information do bacteria possess?

Are you seriously equating the lifestyle of bacteria to the lifestyle of humans?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![PDPrice](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/pdprice/32/6024_2.png) [@PDPrice](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/PDPrice)\
**Post date:** [April 27, 2020, 1:24pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-evolutionary-worldview/10524/70 "2020-04-27T13:24:16Z")

</div>

> [@T.j\_Runyon](#):
>
> Yes there is. Like I said there is no way in hell our species could survive for the length of time it has in the type of rapidily changing environments we have if our cognitive falculties weren’t mostly reliable.

I already responded to this and you deliberately ignored most of what I said. Based on that, why would you think I would continue any further discussion?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![T.j\_Runyon](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/t.j_runyon/32/9662_2.png) [@T.j\_Runyon](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/T.j_Runyon)\
**Post date:** [April 27, 2020, 1:25pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-evolutionary-worldview/10524/71 "2020-04-27T13:25:07Z")

</div>

> [@PDPrice](#):
>
> I already responded to this and you deliberately ignored most of what I said. Based on that, why would you think I would continue any further discussion?

No you didn’t. You asked questions that were already answered in the passage I shared. It was you doing the ignoring

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![T.j\_Runyon](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/t.j_runyon/32/9662_2.png) [@T.j\_Runyon](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/T.j_Runyon)\
**Post date:** [April 27, 2020, 1:28pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-evolutionary-worldview/10524/72 "2020-04-27T13:28:42Z")

</div>

> [@PDPrice](#):
>
> the abilities we must assume we do have points to our Creator

How does your worldview explain things like  
Cognitive biases and faulty memories? These are much easier to explain on naturalism. Why would God create beings with these problems if he wanted to create beings capable of determining truth?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![PDPrice](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/pdprice/32/6024_2.png) [@PDPrice](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/PDPrice)\
**Post date:** [April 27, 2020, 1:29pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-evolutionary-worldview/10524/73 "2020-04-27T13:29:08Z")

</div>

> [@Roy](#):
>
> But why should I believe you track things to their source? You didn’t track the Lewontin quote to its [source](https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1997/01/09/billions-and-billions-of-demons/), you cited a creationist article instead.

That’s because I have the [creation.com](http://creation.com) article URL memorized and can type it easily. You can easily go the the original source from there by way of searching (as I have myself).

> [@Roy](#):
>
> I know I’ve been lied to. I’ve been lied to by creationists and IDers. Thousands and thousands of times. That’s why I know you’ve been lied to as well.

We’re not going to get anywhere. But thanks for your participation.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![PDPrice](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/pdprice/32/6024_2.png) [@PDPrice](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/PDPrice)\
**Post date:** [April 27, 2020, 1:35pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-evolutionary-worldview/10524/74 "2020-04-27T13:35:10Z")

</div>

> [@T.j\_Runyon](#):
>
> Why would God create beings with these problems if he wanted to create beings capable of determining truth?

He didn’t. We rebelled and the Curse came in afterwards. We do not exist as God originally created and intended. We are twisted by our own rebellion.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![T.j\_Runyon](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/t.j_runyon/32/9662_2.png) [@T.j\_Runyon](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/T.j_Runyon)\
**Post date:** [April 27, 2020, 1:36pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-evolutionary-worldview/10524/75 "2020-04-27T13:36:25Z")

</div>

> [@PDPrice](#):
>
> He didn’t. We rebelled and the Curse came in afterwards.

Can you show that we once had no biases and perfect memories?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![PDPrice](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/pdprice/32/6024_2.png) [@PDPrice](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/PDPrice)\
**Post date:** [April 27, 2020, 1:37pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-evolutionary-worldview/10524/76 "2020-04-27T13:37:02Z")

</div>

> [@T.j\_Runyon](#):
>
> Can you show that we once had no biases and perfect memories?

Can you read Genesis 1?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![T.j\_Runyon](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/t.j_runyon/32/9662_2.png) [@T.j\_Runyon](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/T.j_Runyon)\
**Post date:** [April 27, 2020, 1:37pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-evolutionary-worldview/10524/77 "2020-04-27T13:37:51Z")

</div>

> [@PDPrice](#):
>
> Can you read Genesis 1?

Yep. And I don’t ever remember it saying anything about cognition. Show your work, sweetheart.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Rumraket](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/rumraket/32/9328_2.png) [@Rumraket](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Rumraket)\
**Post date:** [April 27, 2020, 1:38pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-evolutionary-worldview/10524/78 "2020-04-27T13:38:27Z")

</div>

> [@PDPrice](#):
>
> Accurate information is not needed for survival.

I’m sure you’ve managed to convince yourself of that. Why do we demand people pass sight tests for driver’s or pilot licences? Do you think that has anything to do with how likely they are to get themselves and others hurt or killed?

> [@PDPrice](#):
>
> Effective information is needed, if any information at all.

Yes and what is it that would _make_ some information _be_ effective? What is the _effective-making_ property of information in _promoting_ survival anyway? To avoid things that _really are threats_, and to seek out and find things that _really do_ sustain and help you propagate yourself. Being wrong about that literally directly translates to probabilites of survival or not.

> [@PDPrice](#):
>
> What information do bacteria possess?

Genetic, compositional, and environmental information. They have senses (in the form of various molecular receptors), and genetic and molecular networks of interaction that act on them. If a bacterium incorrectly senses the presence of a nutrient far away, and then expends all it’s remaining energy spinning it’s flagellum swimming towards it, yet doesn’t actually find it because it isn’t there, then it dies, does not pass start, and does not collect 2000 dollars.

> [@PDPrice](#):
>
> Yet, bacteria are more evolutionarily successful than humans.

Yes, and they are remarkably good at detecting and acting on environmental influences.

> [@PDPrice](#):
>
> What matters is that you believe what happens to allow you to survive. Nothing more.

Yes and if you believe things about the world that are completely wrong(as in the opposite of, or mostly in contradiction to actual reality) it would be really strange indeed if this just so happened to still systematically promote survival.

Being right about your beliefs in what is likely to be dangerous, and what is not, and what can be eaten, and where to find it, seems to me more likely to promote survival, than being systematically wrong in those beliefs and still nevertheless surviving and reproducing successfully.

What you’re saying, while conceptually possible(as in merely imaginable, an incredibly low bar), is nevertheless intrinsically less plausible than the alternative that true beliefs promote survival better and more often than false ones.

> [@PDPrice](#):
>
> The ability to grasp lofty abstract notions like “truth” is a luxury your worldview simply cannot reasonably accommodate

You declare, but have advanced no argument to support. Meanwhile you just invoke yet another one in a seemingly endless line of bare and mere assumption to “justify” it on yours.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![PDPrice](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/pdprice/32/6024_2.png) [@PDPrice](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/PDPrice)\
**Post date:** [April 27, 2020, 1:40pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-evolutionary-worldview/10524/79 "2020-04-27T13:40:30Z")

</div>

> [@Rumraket](#):
>
> What you’re saying, while conceptually possible(as in merely imaginable, an incredibly low bar), is nevertheless intrinsically less plausible than the alternative that true beliefs promote survival better and more often than false ones.

So it’s conceptually **possible** that you have no accurate knowledge of anything, but rather you have knowledge that, while false, happens to help you survive. Can you be clear that that is what you are saying here?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![gbrooks9](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/gbrooks9/32/7979_2.png) [@gbrooks9](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/gbrooks9)\
**Post date:** [April 27, 2020, 1:42pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-evolutionary-worldview/10524/80 "2020-04-27T13:42:19Z")

</div>

> [@gbrooks9](#):
>
> Are you logically opposed to God using natural processes to deliver his plan to the Universe?

@PDPrice

This is a copy of my question I left for you 18 hours ago.

Is there a Biblical reason that you think God would never use evolutionary processes to generate life forms?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Rumraket](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/rumraket/32/9328_2.png) [@Rumraket](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Rumraket)\
**Post date:** [April 27, 2020, 1:42pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-evolutionary-worldview/10524/81 "2020-04-27T13:42:21Z")

</div>

> [@PDPrice](#):
>
> So it’s conceptually **possible** that you have no accurate knowledge of anything, but rather you have knowledge that, while false, happens to help you survive. Can you be clear that that is what you are saying here?

Yes, possible, as in imaginable. But that is all it is, an imaginary situation. You have no way of showing this idea actually obtains. And for the reasons explained above, it is less plausible than the alternative.

It simply _makes more sense_ that correctly understanding the real world is more likely to promote survival, than it is that incorrectly understanding the real world is more likely to promote survival.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![PDPrice](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/pdprice/32/6024_2.png) [@PDPrice](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/PDPrice)\
**Post date:** [April 27, 2020, 1:45pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-evolutionary-worldview/10524/82 "2020-04-27T13:45:00Z")

</div>

> [@Rumraket](#):
>
> Yes, possible, as in imaginable. But that is all it is, an imaginary situation. You have no way of showing this idea actually obtains. And for the reasons explained above, it is less plausible than the alternative.

No, that’s a problem. It’s not possible at all within my own worldview, but within yours it is a possibility that you would have no way, **in principle** , of ever discounting.

In other words, you don’t have any certain knowledge of anything. All you have is assumptions and allegedly ‘plausible’ conjectures.

You say it’s “imaginary”, but how could you know it is only imaginary? You have already admitted it as a **real possibility** , and you would have no way of knowing, on your own worldview, that that possibility was not also an actuality.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Intjer](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/intjer/32/2085_2.png) [@Intjer](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Intjer)\
**Post date:** [April 27, 2020, 1:45pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-evolutionary-worldview/10524/83 "2020-04-27T13:45:11Z")

</div>

> [@Rumraket](#):
>
> I understand, but I think that willingness to see past the differences has to come from both sides.

If one party wants to use words as a bridge but the other party wants to use words as a weapon to score points for his side, not much will be accomplished.

[Previous page](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-evolutionary-worldview/10524.md?page=3)

[Next page](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-evolutionary-worldview/10524.md?page=5)