The overwhelming evidence that Evolution has occurred can be ignored because we don't know the ultimate origins of life. True or false? [Spirituality & Religion]

@Theseus

They certainly do call it that for a reason.

But what do you think is the reason?

@Pikachu Because, before a theory can become a law in science, the theory must be repeatable by or under strictly controlled rules of experimentation. Evolution cannot be replicated on a scale larger than micro-organisms with very short lifespans.

On anything larger we must INFER evolution by way of characteristic similarities in speciation between genetically linked subgroups: science by syllogism, if you will.

@Theseus

But a theory never becomes a law. They are not different levels on the hierarchy of scientific certainty, they describe different things.

A law describes what happens while a theory describes why and how.

Eg> the law of gravitation describes that objects are pulled towards a nearby object of sufficient mass.
The theory of gravity describes how and why this happens.

A scientific theory is simple the best most consistent, coherent and predictive model for describing a natural phenomenon.
And [i]that[/i] is why evolution is called capital T, scientific Theory.

@Pikachu
I know this one!

They CALL it a theory cuz that's what is!

@Pikachu Understand that I don't have an issue with evolutionary theory, but I'm old school about definitions. Scientific or otherwise, a theory is still a postulation; an idea or educated guess as to the nature of a thing, phenomenon or function.

@Budwick

Yup. But the misunderstanding often seems to occur when we ask what a theory is.

@Pikachu Jeepers Pik, where did you study?
Do you think you can get a refund?

the·o·ry
Dictionary result for theory
/ˈTHirē/
noun
noun: theory; plural noun: theories

a supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, especially one based on general principles independent of the thing to be explained.
"Darwin's theory of evolution"

@Theseus

Well what do you mean by oldschool? I mean, that's the definition of a scientific theory. That's what it is.

@Budwick

I'm just real impressed that you know how to google, but i rather think the point went over you head.

The point was of course that many people consider the word theory to be synonymous with hypothesis while in science it means much more.

All caught up?

@Pikachu Actually, I think the point is that you are trying to change the definition of words for your own benefit.

@Theseus The reason being it is the best explanation currently available for all the evidence.

@Budwick

[quote] I think the point is that you are trying to change the definition of words for your own benefit.
[/quote]

Not at all.

Are you admitting right here that you don't know what the word theory means in a scientific context?

If that's the case, I'd be happy help you out.

@Budwick Foo'PAH!

@Pikachu No need.
You've [i][b]demonstrated [/b][/i]that YOU don't know!

@Pikachu See Budwick's response. Otherwise, "old school" denotes orthodoxy.

@Pikachu hypothesis and theory are fungible even in science.

@OggggO The problem, of course, is that the evidence is incomplete. Until it is complete, the underlying assumptions of science and theism are equal in merit.

@Theseus Yeah, tomato - tomahto!

@Theseus

[quote]hypothesis and theory are fungible even in science.[/quote]

But that's not true.

OggggO has shared a good disambiguation.

@Theseus So, it's sort of like they must 'have faith' in their theory.
Interesting.

@Budwick

I think theseus is more honest than to agree with you there.

What part of evolution theory do you feel requires faith in order to accept?

@Pikachu I saw that. Indeed it WAS good, but I don't accept it. A word in any language must have a specific meaning across or regardless of contexts, or the word becomes meaning-less.

In any case, I get what you're saying. The best resolution to the dilemma is to use or coin a different discriptor in the place of theory.

@Budwick No, it’s the opposite of having faith.

@Theseus “Lead”

@Theseus

[quote]A word in any language must have a specific meaning across or regardless of contexts[/quote]

But context is important.
Doesn't the mere existence of homonyms undermine that stance?