TED Conversations

Gerald O'brian

TEDCRED 50+

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Evolution: "just a theory". Scientific caution is sometimes confusing.

The fact that our best available theories are still speculations misleads some people to believe that these ideas are not founded. Hence, some people suppose their uneducated opinion is just as bad, or as good, as the mainstream scientific hypothesis.
This trend is probably led by the way science has been taught, i e as a flawless method that offers facts about reality.
And by pre-scientific philosophy, still strong in our modern societies.

Evolution is "just a theory" the way Notre Dame is "just a pile of rocks", isn't it?

Thoughts?

+6
Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    May 26 2013: "Science is the worst way of knowing, except all the other methods" - Daniel Gilbert. (http://bigthink.com/videos/does-religion-inform-your-worldview-2)
    The scientific method is one of the best ways to get closer to the truth, and is one of the finest accomplishments of the human raise.
    Why?
    It gets rid of human biases like the "Confirmation bias" and works by a process of falsification, the mistakes we make (with our theories) bring us closer to the "truth", than any other method we have ever created.
    Scientific method works by these 6 steps :
    1. Come up with a question about the world.
    2. Create a (reasonable falsifiable) hypothesis – one possible answer to the question.
    3. Design an experiment, or find some observational data.
    4. Experiment and collect the data.
    5. Draw conclusions from the experiment, or observational data.
    6. Communicate them to others, and these "others" will try to falsify your results.
    It's worth mentioning that you should try and define (or describe) your terms.
    This is why I think "Does God Exist" is a unscientific question, mainly because no one has actaully defined the terms (to a logically valid way) "God" and "Existence". This is problematic to any scientist. To me it is like asking does "X Y?". I don't know...)
    Considering, as many on TED know, that I have started up debates like "Can you define God? Or in other words what is God?" and "Can we design an experiment to (dis)prove God?". All these answers have basically been "No".
    So I feel any scientist should remain an agnostic about such a question. (Also "God" isn't really falsifiable...)
    However with regards, to evolution. I have no doubt that evolution is the best theory around at explaining things (considering it requires the least amount of assumptions) and have been "experimentally" verified.
    So what am I getting at?
    Evolution is the best theory around (a lot better than creationism) at explaining things.

    P.S : Sorry for deleting my replies. Wanted to make the "perfect reply".
    • May 30 2013: "Science" will not prove GODS existence, because GOD was not created in the universe, GOD is the creator of the universe. GOD was not created by the smallest particles and or elements that are in the universe, science will only prove the existence of everything in the universe by the who, what, when, where, why and how but not GOD. Science is organized knowledge, whos knowledge? GODS knowledge, for GOD has given mankind the "understanding" of his knowledge he has gardened within the universe. without the "understanding" we would not have knowledge. GOD gave us, mankind the power over his knowledge he has gardened within the universe by giving us the "understanding" in birth. "But I speak Thy TRUTH, you would have no power over me unless it was given to you from the Father our GOD"

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.