TED Conversations

E G
  • E G
  • Bacau
  • Romania

TEDCRED 10+

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

The evolution theory & religion

In many people views this two are very opposite even irreconcilable and I agree with them , but what do you think ? Should we strive to find a relation of compatibility between this two ?
Do you think only one is corect and the other is certainly false or both have corect parts and false parts?
What is the relation between this two ? is there one?
Where are we going to in our evolution process ?

0
Share:

Closing Statement from E G

Thank you all for your participation to this conversation , have been said many things about the relations between the evolution theory and religion in this conversation , some of you think that there is no relation between them , some of you think like me that there are some relations and this two are compatible ,partially at least, but anyhow it is a thing is certain : you are in the middle of it , it's up to you.Perhaps we the humans will never reach at an agreement but whatever you think (this is important: to think) try to carve your way to truth .
I've saw also here on this conversation some 'special guys' who put themselves to extremes , one of them until I mentioned the name of a scientist I was talking for nothing (even though when I’ve done it I was saying and some stupid things ) , the others was neglecting completely the evolution theory but this are the usual extremes .
Don’t forget : It’s up to you , make it to be rational and true as much as possible ................good luck.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    May 13 2011: It's entirely possible for a person to be a follower of religion yet subscribe to the theories of science. In our era, there are less strict followers of religion, which explains why such theories are not accepted with the shock and disgust that was present in the 1800s when Darwin first introduced the theory of evolution. And I think this readiness to believe in both comes from our abilities to compartmentalize and select what we agree with. For example, a person may agree with what is said of evolution and the big bang theory (thus disagreeing with creationism) but still believes in a higher omnipotent being who judges their actions and whose values they live their lives by.
    • May 13 2011: Hi Elizabeth, you hit the nail on the head when you describe cell change. When a species mutates, it not only mutates to benefit its own species, but all species. The food chain is one example. What I think Birdia couldn't grasp was: the environment is only the trigger, it's what pulls the trigger that will give us the answers we crave. In the absence of a creator, the information for change can only come from the species. It is how this information is passed on that has been my interest over the years. When the cell change occurs, along with all the necessary information that is required, it makes the mind boggle to think that it could happen without some divine intervention. It's no wonder that man is a very spiritual being.
      • thumb
        May 14 2011: It's complicated, but it has happened. Just looking at eukaryotic cells, it looks like its has been designed rather than something haphazardly created by nature. But by observing the membrane structures within, you can see how they have developed, for example the mitochondria being prokaryotic cells that have been 'swallowed' by the bigger eukaryotes.
        And think of it this way: nature has been tweaking for billions of years. Plenty of time to get it to where it is today.
    • thumb

      E G 10+

      • 0
      May 14 2011: Elizabeth:
      I agree, this happen but how happen with our identity if we don't believe in something and only in something , if we divide our mind ? I mean we can compartmentalize and select what we agree with but even so must be a continuity , a consistency what we believe in , our identity is gone otherwise , what do you think ?
      • thumb
        May 15 2011: I don't think the human race knows enough for there to be continuity in anything. The more we discover about the world around us, the more ignorant we are.
        • thumb

          E G 10+

          • 0
          May 15 2011: I would be very tempted to agree with you ..............but I'm not, I think that for us we know enough to can have continuity what we believe in because the continuity is a relation which doesn't depends on what we know but on what everything can be known, on what this everything have in common , we know something very little but what is important is that we know . Taking it form another perspective we talk here about what we know and what we know is true , but we know more things which are true so there is something what bound them : their truthfulness and this what bound them give them continuity , we can't see the big picture of course but we can see a part from this picture , but the bid picture have continuity , wouldn't be a big picture otherwise so and it's parts have continuity ...................... we must have identity , in fact I think is more correctly to say that we must tend, strive to have identity .
          "The more we discover about the world around us, the more ignorant we are" I don't think it's correct your formulation , the more we know the less ignorant we are , but the more we know the more we are aware of how much ignorant we are.
      • thumb
        May 15 2011: Look at space. When we knew little about it, in the times of Copernicus, our view of life, the Earth and the cosmos was simple: organisms were created by a divine body, the Earth was flat, the solar system was geocentric and not much was known about anything further. But now, we know the Earth is a sphere. Our solar system is heliocentric. We know more about the Universe, but the more we know, the more we realize we don't know. We have to theorize as to how things work and how they happen, for example evolution, the big bang and so forth. But even then (particularly about space) there are gaping holes in our knowledge that we wouldn't have known existed had we not made this theory in the first place. It is by that I men the more we know, the less we really do.

        And if relation is what we seek in what we know, not a cyclical continuity that I refer to, it won't be an issue to believe in a religion and in evolution at the same time.
        • thumb

          E G 10+

          • 0
          May 15 2011: Elizabeth:
          (I've spelt wrong the last time but I've corrected myself a bit now .)
          I see your point better now and I agree with it (it's exatcly what I meant yo say).
          What do you mean by cyclical continuity ?
          I think that what we know are relations and these have continuity . Someone could say that the form of the Earth is a fact : it is spheroid , maybe but for us this fact is made up only from relations which are set in our mind between more knowledge (and how ew get the knowledgeinvolve some relations.............). We talk here about the evolution theory , it is more relations combined , we talk about religion which is formed also from relations . I think that the reality known by us is made up only from relations and objects between which are set this relations, how could we set some relations if we don't have continuity what we believe in ?
          I mean with all this that any system of knowledge is make up from relations.
      • thumb
        May 16 2011: Cyclical continuity: continuity that spans over everything. One thing explains another, which explains another and eventually you come full circle.
        And we don't need to have continuity in we know or believe in because we simply don't know enough. There are inconsistencies in the bible, for example (http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/inconsistencies.html) for your reference.
        • thumb

          E G 10+

          • 0
          May 16 2011: And if I won't come to a full circle , would be it cyclical or causal continuity ? I mean cyclical means to reach at the starting point , what do you think this happen ? You said :"And we don't need to have continuity in we know or believe in because we simply don't know enough." do you think that the need of having continuity depends on what we know ? how? But how can we made up theories if we don't have continuity what we know or believe in ? How can we talk about science if we don't have continuity ? I mean without continuity we can't explain anything so will be only some facts, objects that have no link between them. More than that how can we know something logical and rational about us if we don't have continuity?
          Ok, we don't know enough and we will never know perhaps , but actually we know something, in this something isn't there continuity? how can we talk about limits if we don't have continuity ? The reason suppose continuity. What do you think?
      • thumb
        May 18 2011: If continuity is so essential to understanding science, how on Earth did we ever manage to progress beyond our archaic beliefs? It's this lack of continuity, the lack of knowledge that drives us to learn more, not hinder us.
        • thumb

          E G 10+

          • 0
          May 18 2011: I don't know why seems to you that (from your example) if our arhaic beliefs was wrong we can't have continuity what we believe in, we can actually because as I said the continuity don't says in the knowledge but in the process of gathering knowledge , in the process of thinking , we perhaps had believed something wrong but we had been moving on , it means continuity (it's like a limit in math which tends to infinite ).
        • thumb
          May 18 2011: Where did Mozart his music come from, which continuity and/or chaos.
        • thumb

          E G 10+

          • 0
          May 19 2011: chaos from the continuity of his mind and his spirit
        • thumb
          May 19 2011: a subjective thought;

          a Muse whispered it in his ear. She has been trying with many people, though he was the first one who heard it. (Stephen Pressfield - The War of Art)

          A professional artist knows he/she did not come up with the creative idea him/herself. It's tapping into the collective consciousness and maybe even higher to pass something we humans need to go further, to grow.
        • thumb

          E G 10+

          • 0
          May 20 2011: hmm.................I think we should be carefull : "It's tapping into the collective consciousness" but yet only one have heard the whispered, nothing collective here .
        • thumb
          May 20 2011: Only one heared it it seems, Bach also, Picasso also, Lazslo also. If we all listen well we hear something aswell, a path for yourself for example; where do you go too? what drives you? What is your passion?
        • thumb

          E G 10+

          • 0
          May 20 2011: only one and only one ... comparing their number with the number of the humankind .
          Perhaps we can hear something aswell but it isn't depending on ourselves totally .
        • thumb
          May 20 2011: yes, totally on yourself. If you want to achieve something good, work hard on it, you will see the right things come in your head and the right people on your path.

          And now back to the topic ;)
    • thumb
      May 14 2011: I agree elisabeth. It is enlightenment which put us into duality. On what we can measure and what we can't. The indigenous before that turnaround had only one realm and that is the material and 'spiritual' are together one.
      With all the time we have to read and share thoughts with like minded, we start to believe more in our intuition again, making from a few of us modern indigenous.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.