Evolution is Just a Theory - Theory vs. Law

The focus should not be between whether or not evolution is a theory or a law, as in, "I'll take evolution seriously when to goes from a theory to a law." Instead the debate should be between the theory of evolution going from a theory to a disproven theory. The distinction is important and I'd like to briefly outline why.

The usage of the word 'theory' in science is quite distinct from our normal, vernacular usage. In science, the term means 'model' or 'explanation' that incorporates a vast body of knowledge.

Other 'theories' that demonstrate the usage of the word 'theory' in science: cell theory (that tissue is made up of cells), germ theory (diseases and colds are caused by microscopic bacteria, protists and viruses), atomic theory (matter is composed of atoms), theory of gravity (the force of gravity is the explanation for the orbit of stars, planets, galaxies and objects to the Earth), theory of heliocentrism (the Sun is the center of the solar system).

This confusion is the source of some fun internet memes:

A scientific 'law' is not an explanation or model, like a theory, it's a simple statement of this does that. Newton's laws are a go to example--"A body in motion will stay in motion unless acted upon by an outside force". It offers no explanation like a 'theory' would, only a relationship--this does that. If we were to write that law as a theory we'd have to offer some explanation as to *why* it happened that way--something about mass, inertia, Higgs-Bosons, etc.

So in conclusion, the Theory of Evolution could *never* become a law because it could never stop being an explanation as to why biology looks the way it does today. That said, it could become something else--a disproven theory. All it would take for the theory of evolution to be disproven is one fossil, one organism, one anatomical structure, one DNA sequence, one piece of evidence that could definitely disprove common ancestry of life. It shouldn't be shocking that the Theory of Evolution has never become a law, but it should be unbelievably shocking that the theory has never been disproven. The Theory of Evolution has been under constant fire from day one 150 years ago and it has never once shown a sign of weakening. It has only gotten stronger as more evidence has been produced.

Bible Verses that Can Be Conversation Killers

There are people that may misread what I'm writing saying that I'm trying to be disparaging to the Bible. Not at all. I'm trying to open channels of dialogue and there are particular interpretations of these verses (interpretation and original intent are different, as you well know) that can be walls to crucial conversations between ideologies/religions.  Some of the below is largely straw man, but nevertheless I've felt the influence in a number of conversations.

Let's keep the dialogue open.

Let's learn from each other.

And, "Come now, and let us reason together." --Isaiah 1:18a

• 1 Corinthians 1:18-25,  "For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written, "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise,
  and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart."  Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe.  For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men."
• The dangerous interpretation/application: "You won't get it. So, why bother talking?"
• Better possible interpretation/application: The foolishness isn't that we should be illogical.  It's that power humbled itself (Phil 2).  It's that our mind, wisdom, faculties are finite and that there's a bigger, grander truth outside of ourselves.

• 1 Corinthians 2:14, "The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit."
• Dangerous interpretation/application: "You can't get it.  You don't have the ability."
• Better possible interpretation/application: We can't do it alone.  We need others to understand.

• 2 Timothy 4:3, "For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear."
• Dangerous interpretation/application: "You only believe what you want,anyway.  So why bother discussing?"
• Possible better interpretation/application: Examine your own itching ears, not others.  And as the later context admonishes, "Always be sober-minded."

• Romans 9:20-21, "But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, "Why have you made me like this?"  Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use?"
• Dangerous interpretation/application: "Don't ask questions."
• Possible better interpretation/application: Have intellectual humility.  In light of the nature/nurture debate, recognize much of people's weaknesses are not their fault and be patient with them.

• Job 40:2,7-8, "Shall a faultfinder contend with the Almighty?  He who argues with God, let him answer it...Dress for action like a man; I will question you, and you make it known to me.  Will you even put me in the wrong?  Will you condemn me that you may be in the right?"
• Dangerous interpretation/application: "I'm a bug.  I can't get it.  I shouldn't question."
• Possible better interpretation/application:  The universe doesn't always need to make sense to be true.  It doesn't need our approval.  It stands outside of us.  Don't condemn the universe just to be right.  Don't set yourself above reality as its judge.

• Jude 1: 18b-19, “'In the last times there will be scoffers who will follow their own ungodly desires.'  These are the people who divide you, who follow mere natural instincts and do not have the Spirit."
• Dangerous interpretation/application: "Everyone else is lost and incapable of being reasoned with.  Their god is their stomach."
• Possible better interpretation/application: Watch your own desires.  Consider your own motivations for believing what you do. Do as the later context says, "Have mercy on those who doubt."

• 2 Peter 3:3-4, "Above all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.”
• Dangerous interpretation/application: "Your not getting it was predicted.  No point in talking."
• Possible better interpretation/application:  Not everyone has to agree with you.  That's okay.  Peace is still possible.

• Isaiah 55:9, “As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts."
• Dangerous interpretation/application: "I can't even get it.  You certainly can't.  No point in trying."
• Better possible interpretation/application: Don't follow the example of others who do not forgive and are not faithful (based on context).

• Proverbs 3:5, "Trust in the LORD with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding."
• Dangerous interpretation/application: "Don't think.  Just blindly trust."
• Better possible interpretation/application: As the later context says, "Be not wise in your own eyes."

Thoughts? Reactions?  Other scriptures?  Where did I go wrong in interpretation/application?

How to Appreciate Other Religions/Political Parties

This isn't compromising your beliefs.  Keep your beliefs, but learn how to appreciate where others are coming from, too. Even if for no other reason than to understand how to change their mind better!!

  Do you ever feel like you can't bring up the dual conversational unmentionables--politics and religion--without getting frustrated or upset?  Read on then!

• Finding Common Ground
• Values
• Many times beliefs are different ways of expressing the same values.  It's tragic that we don't realize this enough.  Let me give some examples.  
• Healthcare in the US--to definitely and admittedly oversimplify, one group thinks it barbaric to withhold proper medical care to the poor in one of the richest countries in the world.  Why?  Because they care about people.  That's the heart value that drives their beliefs.  The other side doesn't want universal health care because they think it will drastically reduce the quality of the care and further dig America into a debt hole.  Why?  Because they care about people.  Same value.  Different application.  Different way of serving that value.
• How about another extremely heated topic--abortion?  One side says abortion is wrong and their value is that human life (the baby's) is precious.  The other says abortion is morally permissible because life (the mother's) is precious.  Each can say one side is mistaken or deluded, but it helps me to avoid vilification to understand what value is driving the person's belief and often how drastically similar they are to mine--trying to protect a life. 
• Remember to remember why people are passionate about causes--they care!  They really love something!                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    

• Questions
• You may not have the same answers as someone in a different religion, but many times your heart is still crying out the same questions.  
• What's the purpose of my life?  Help/love others, glorify God, attain enlightenment, jihad, etc.--all different answers to the same question.
• Where did I come from?  God, evolution, God+evolution--different answers, same heart cry.
• How can I live on past death?  Nirvana, Valhalla, Heaven, Moksha, legacy, etc.--same desire for ourselves and our loved ones--that we'll live on in some respect. 

• Debating Safely
• Get Down to the Fundamental Question of the Debate
• E.g., the fundamental question surrounding abortion is, when does a human become a human?
• For universal healthcare it may be something like, what is the role of the government?  What are inalienable human rights?
• Getting down to the fundamental question that is actually being debated has two positive effects:
• Clarity is brought and distraction can be set aside
• It can show how gray the subject really is.  Highlighting ambiguity builds compassion and patience over disagreements.

• Understanding Differences
• Reactionaries
• Show me an extremist, a fundamentalist, a fringe voice and I'll show you a reactionary.  People that have extreme views or ways of expressing themselves aren't usually crazy--they're trying to use a valuable communication tool--contrast.  E.g., the most drastic tree hugging environmentalists aren't off the wall--they're trying to live and speak in such a way that shouts above the distracting hum of life.  If the rest of us actually cared like we should they wouldn't have to go to such extreme measures of living/behaving/communicating.  They aren't crazy.  They're just trying to get heard.  Same with any other example from religion, politics--fundamentalism, conservatism, liberalism, etc.  Don't hear what/how they're saying it so much as you hear their heart and what they're contrasting themselves with.  Furthermore, recognize the importance of reactionaries in society--nothing would change (as it needs to) without prophets, heralds, extremists, fundamentalists.  Find the middle ground between the two polar opposite extremists and you'll often find the truth.

• False  Dichotomy 
• Maybe you're both right
• 'Either' / 'or' thinking  vs. 'both' / 'and':  Sometimes it isn't 'either' this 'or' that.  Sometimes it's 'both' this 'and' that.
• Perhaps the goal isn't about promoting one ideology and eliminating the other, but instead listening to both sides and finding a balance.
• Different Kinds of Truth
• A person, religion or political party can be dead wrong about one category of truth, but on the money in another.  This may sound strange to your ears, but hear me out.  What is truth at its most fundamental level?  An idea that helps you deal with reality, life, yourself, others.  Truth is a mental tool to navigate reality.
• Philosophical Truth
•  E.g., 'a' can not be 'non-a' at the same time and in the same sense.  That is absolutely true, but it is a very different kind of 'true' from the next kind of truth.
• Empirical Truth
• The kind of truth you get from a laboratory, an experiment, a test tube--the sciencey kind.  You're manipulating, removing and isolating variables to test a hypothesis.
• Descriptive Truth
• The kind of truth you get from the field, observations.  Your paying attention in order to learn something about a process, correlation, potential causation, etc--seeing patterns.
• Historical Truth
• Can't test it, can't observe it, but many of us would agree that it exists (at least beyond a reasonable doubt).  We  believe in it so much that we bet people's lives on it. #CapitalPunishment
• Ethical Truth
• "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."
• "Don't do unto others as you would not have them do unto you."
• Instead of completely discounting a religion's holy scripture because you disagree with its empirical, descriptive truth maybe it is time that you started to appreciate its ethical truth and the next category below.
• Proverbial/Wisdom Truth
• "It is more blessed to give than to receive."
• "A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush."
• "Don't look a gift horse in the mouth."
• "Don't remove a fly from a friend's head with an axe."
• "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."
• "Go to the ant, thou sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise."
• If you really care about living life well you'll learn to appreciate wisdom from surprising and unexpected places.  You can learn a lot from a heretic.
• Artistic Truth
• Good literature, art, movies, mythology, comedy can often leave us saying something like, "That is sooo true."  (Especially good comedy.)  Art can get us to realize something that was right in front of us, but hadn't seen before.  It can resonate our deepest, inmost being.
• Paradigmatic Truth
• Gives us a framework to think within, a scaffolding to build understanding.  This is true both in science and in religion.  The easiest example I can think of is light.  By analogy we speak of light as being a particle and a wave.  In reality it's neither.  And both...Speaking of light as a wave and a particle may not be true in a literal sense, but incredibly true in a paradigm sense and is enormously beneficial for scientists.  (The same could be said of String Theory, analogies for dimensions greater than three, etc.)  In a similar, analogical, paradigmatic way religion can be similar.  It doesn't have to be true to be a helpful way to think about the universe and that has great and significant value.  More thoughts here.

• Perfectly Understandable Reasons That People Will Never Change Their Minds
• Trust (see more below)
• Loyalty: Is it really reasonable to expect people to turn their backs on their friends and families ideology?  
• Identity:  Is it really reasonable to expect people to give up their ideology and have to complete refigure out who they are?

• Concessions - Why It Isn't So Bad After All
• Good vs Right: Maybe not everyone has to be right.  Maybe being just being good isn't such a bad concession.
• Intermediary Beliefs: Can you imagine going to a remote tribes person and trying to explain the internet to them?  Before you could explain what the internet was you'd have to explain what a computer was, but to do that you'd have to explain what a machine was and then you'd have to explain what electricity was and then you'd have to explain...Historically maybe mythology and a great many false ideas were an essential stepping stones that absolutely had to be used to us where we are today.  Maybe we owe today's stepping stones a great deal of deference for getting us where we are today and for taking us to a better tomorrow.
• Beliefs Have Functions
• To balance out extremes: Polar opposites might be a way that the cybernetic system of society maintains balance.
• For the greater social good: Maybe the ideology that you're frustrated that someone you know believes is the only thing holding back anarchy in their life and in society at large?  Maybe you're completely unaware of all the positive ripple effects it is causing and that if you were aware of them you'd shut the h*ll up and not argue with them so vociferously.  

• Justified False Beliefs
• People for thousands of years people thought the Earth was flat and that the Sun moved across the sky.  They weren't idiots and they weren't suppressing the truth.  They were justified in their belief based on what they knew.  We'd all do well to remember that each one of us is a product of our culture and that in other's shoes we'd believe the same thing as they do.

• Attribution
• Malevolence vs. Benevolence: We have a choice in how to interpret people's beliefs--either negatively like they're stupid or maliciously denying truth or positively like they're trusting individuals or they're trying to protect something precious or they're acting out of a pure intentions/heart, etc.  It is far, far more likely that their beliefs are a reflection of their virtue and not their vice, strength and not weakness--their deep seated convictions and character.  Remember that.
• Internal vs.  External:  Are  they the devil or are they a victim of the devil?? Kind of nature vs. nurture.  Does a person believe something because they are a certain way or because they were raised a certain way?

• In-Group / Out-Group--Evolution's Legacy
• In our evolutionary past it paid to:
• Trust insiders unquestioningly.  If you want to take down a woolly mammoth together you have got to have each other's back without hesitation.  This legacy lives on in the tenacity we hold on to cultural beliefs even far past their expiration date.  Why wouldn't a person trust what ever their parents or an authority figure says?  Why would people lie to them?  Trust is a very good thing and the very reason  human society has come as far as it has.  Remembering that can help us see eye to eye with people we disagree with.  Consider your own beliefs.  How much do your beliefs line up with your chosen group's?  That might not be such a good thing...
• Distrust of others.  Let's face it.  We have a violent past.  There were time periods in our history in which something like a third or a quarter of all adult males died in battle (proof for this can be seen in the numerous bashed in skulls we've found and from comparing with current day tribal communities).  If you didn't distrust outsiders you died.  Therefore, our default state is to distrust anyone that is different--skin color, ideology, religion, political party, etc.  Distrusting and vilifying outsiders got us ahead in the past, but now it only hurts us and the world.  When you find yourself thinking in terms of 'us', 'them' remember where that distrust comes from and then remember to expand your circle.  The most important 'we' today includes everybody.  E.g., get beyond 'Republican' and 'Democrat' to something larger like 'Human'.

• Simian Simpletons
• What is the evolutionary purpose of our brain?  Survive and reproduce.  Not think rationally and critically.  It isn't to understand science, math and logic.  It is much, much more of a relationship machine than it is a computer.  It should be more shocking to us that we ever think logically than that we sometimes have lapses in judgement.  Be patient with your fellow humans.  They're doing the best they can.

• Leaders of Movements and Movements Are Different
• Sarah Palin doesn't represent all Republicans.  Osama Bin Laden doesn't represent all muslims.  Benny Hinn doesn't represent all Christians.  Child molesting priests don't represent the entirety of the Catholic faith.  Stop mixing up movements and leaders.  They're different.  Knock it off.  :)

• You Could Be the Wrong One
• Don't forget it.  
• Ever.  
• Ever.

• Maybe We're Better Off Disagreeing
• Seeing things differently is
• Enriching: ‎"The best way to have a good idea is to have a lot of ideas." --Linus Pauling
• Sharpening: Is anything more stimulating and growing than a good debate?

Pictures from here, here, here, here, here, here, here , here , here , here and here.

Questions to Creationists

How do you win a debate?  Better question yet, how do you win a mind?  I.e. how do you not just win, but convince someone?  Debate is a two pronged spear.  You can't just show evidence.  You have to overcome objections.  You often have to break down a thick fortress of disinformation.  This is [unfortunately] especially true of the evolution and creation debate

So, is there a way to scale the walls and siege the city of creationism's bulwark?

Yes.

Get them out of objection mode and into question mode.  They *have* to be made to think and not just rebut. 

Only a well formed question can do this.

Think of times that someone has really turned your thinking around.  Has it ever been a silver bullet piece of evidence?  Maybe.  Far more likely than not in my mind, is that it was an unshakable question.  A haunting question.  A question that you couldn't run from.  A question that kept you awake at night wondering the answer to, internally wrestling with for hours.

My two questions I ask when debating hardcore creationists before I ever discuss evidences:

What would it take to convince you that evolution is true?  How much evidence?  What kind of evidence?  How would you know that it was valid?  Where would you find it? (Btw, I've had one creationist be honest with me when I asked this question and she said, "The Bible would have to say that it's true."  I then kindly dismissed myself from the conversation and said that she wasn't ready to discuss the matter.)

And

What would nature look like if evolution were true?  What would genetics look like?  What would the fossil record look like?  Geology?  Radiometric dating?  What would anatomy look like?  What would biogeography look like?  Ecology?  The tree of life?  Pathogens?  etc, etc.

Here's the scenario you create by doing that: they either set such a high criteria that they realize they aren't being rational or they set an achievable set of criteria that you then steam roll with thousands of pounds of evidence.  Either way is a battle won.  O, and by the way, if this seems arrogant, feel free to let them turn the tables.  From either direction we have the higher ground.