EVOLUTION: A Catholic Solution?

[The_Barbarian]

I would use an intelligently designed program of selective breeding to ensure that big horses mate with other big horses. (Note: I’m not in the selective breeding business so I know this is an oversimplification).

Or if you were lazy, you could simply find an environment that selected for really big horses, and let natural selection do it.

Would you turn the horses loose on the ranch, and depend on random mutations and natural selection to come up with the Clydesdale replacements?

No.

Why or why not?

Because natural selection, in open plains environments, tends to produce rangy, lean horses somewhat smaller than most domesticated horses today. It would do the opposite of what you want to do. Give them an environment with lots of resources, but limited access to females, and that would probably do it.

BTW, I once posed that question to a class of 8th graders, most of whom got it right.

 

[The_Barbarian]

But to be 100% accurate, the TOE must essentially prove (in my mind) an even deeper level - how DNA is modified over time to take very simple life and end up with very complex life.

Ye, it should be able to show that. So let’s give it a try. Pick some step in the evolution of life, and let’s see if there’s evidence for it.

What would you like to try first?

 

[The_Barbarian]

That is not how the Church understood it for nearly 2000 years. All the Church fathers, saints and doctors of the Church understand it in the literal sense.

Odd then, that the Church never made it a doctrine.

 

[ricmat]

No, the subject is the result of the survey. A claim has been made that a higher percentage of educated people accept evolution than do uneducated people do because educated people suffer from pride.

Actually, I never made that claim.

I do believe that for many people, an advanced education leads to excessive pride. I’m not talking about anyone in particular here, just a general observation. I will also observe that even amongst people with much expertise in any subject, there is still disagreement amongst them, so education does not make one infallible.

Now, if you had to learn about evolution, would you rather learn from a very humble Mother Teresa or a prideful Ken Miller?

Knowledge of evolution is not on the “Heaven Entrance Exam.”

If you had to learn about humility, would you rather learn it from a very humble Mother Teresa or a prideful Ken Miller?

If you had to learn about religion, would you go to the Pope or Richard Dawkins?

 

[Orogeny]

Actually, I never made that claim.

That was the claim I was replying to. It doesn’t matter to me if you made that claim or not.

I do believe that for many people, an advanced education leads to excessive pride. I’m not talking about anyone in particular here, just a general observation. I will also observe that even amongst people with much expertise in any subject, there is still disagreement amongst them, so education does not make one infallible.

Does lack of education make one immune to pride? It seems that that is the implication since the posts on this topic have focused solely on those with an education.

Knowledge of evolution is not on the “Heaven Entrance Exam.”

So? If I remember correctly, you are an engineer. Did you need to know about calculus to get your degree? Do you use it for your job? Did you go to a prideful math teacher to learn it or a humble high school-educated person?

Is calculus on the “Heaven Entrance Exam”?

If you had to learn about humility, would you rather learn it from a very humble Mother Teresa or a prideful Ken Miller?

Mother Teresa. Now I answered your question, can you answer mine?

If you had to learn about religion, would you go to the Pope or Richard Dawkins?

If you had to learn about zoology, would you go to the humble Pope or to the prideful Dawkins?

I don’t expect that you will answer with an actual answer rather than another question, but since you didn’t seem to understand the context of what I wrote in the post that you took exception with, I don’t know that your lack of a straight answer should surprise me.

Peace

Tim

 

[buffalo]

That was the claim I was replying to. It doesn’t matter to me if you made that claim or not.Does lack of education make one immune to pride? It seems that that is the implication since the posts on this topic have focused solely on those with an education.So? If I remember correctly, you are an engineer. Did you need to know about calculus to get your degree? Do you use it for your job? Did you go to a prideful math teacher to learn it or a humble high school-educated person?

Is calculus on the “Heaven Entrance Exam”?Mother Teresa. Now I answered your question, can you answer mine?If you had to learn about zoology, would you go to the humble Pope or to the prideful Dawkins?

I don’t expect that you will answer with an actual answer rather than another question, but since you didn’t seem to understand the context of what I wrote in the post that you took exception with, I don’t know that your lack of a straight answer should surprise me.

Peace

Tim

Hmmmm. That’s a little tricky. The Pope is one man, Dawkins is one man. Their conclusions are based on others.

Ordinarily I would go to the zoologists and look at their research.

If the Pope and the Bishops in communion made a zoology pronouncement I would certainly give it some weight. I would have to carefully consider both sides. Seems that’s the conundrum we have been in.

 

[Orogeny]

Hmmmm. That’s a little tricky. The Pope is one man, Dawkins is one man. Their conclusions are based on others.

Huh? That is true about everything, so I don’t know what that has to do with the question.

Ordinarily I would go to the zoologists and look at their research.

Really? If you don’t already know zoology, how will you determine if they know what they are doing?

Would you do the same for a class in differential equations?

If the Pope and the Bishops in communion made a zoology pronouncement I would certainly give it some weight. I would have to carefully consider both sides. Seems that’s the conundrum we have been in.

Do you trust medical doctors to make medical decisions without a joint pronoucement from the Pope and the bishops? I’m sorry, buffalo, but that is a bizarre requirement.

Peace

Tim

 

[grannymh]

You know, there’s no merit in being flat out stupid. Mother Theresa wouldn’t confuse ignorance with a spiritual gift.

I wonder if Diogenes has an extra light for seeking humility in scientific/theological discussions? Apparently, humility is a personal thing with different applications. Some folks would call humility a “time-out”. No matter. I drop my original question. See you all when I return home.

Blessings,
granny

All human beings are worthy of profound respect.
Refuse FOCA.

 

[buffalo]

Huh? That is true about everything, so I don’t know what that has to do with the question.Really? If you don’t already know zoology, how will you determine if they know what they are doing?

Would you do the same for a class in differential equations?Do you trust medical doctors to make medical decisions without a joint pronoucement from the Pope and the bishops? I’m sorry, buffalo, but that is a bizarre requirement.

Peace

Tim

My point is that if something was Revealed to the Pope and Bishops Catholics would have to listen up.

The Vatican does have the PAS so they are involved. Faith and reason cannot be opposed so I would expect there to be a unified understanding. Catholics can certainly look to the Vatican for science and medical understanding.

 

[Orogeny]

My point is that if something was Revealed to the Pope and Bishops Catholics would have to listen up.

That was never the question. The question is straight forward: If you had to learn zoology, would you go to the humble Pope or the proud Dawkins (or substitute any other Ph.D. in zoology) to learn it?

Is humility more important than knowledge when it comes to teaching a subject? Would the Pope be a better zoology teacher even if he has very limited knowledge of the subject simply because he is humble?

The Vatican does have the PAS so they are involved. Faith and reason cannot be opposed so I would expect there to be a unified understanding. Catholics can certainly look to the Vatican for science and medical understanding.

Again, that wasn’t the question, but, OK, so which part of differential equations has been revealed to the Church? I know of no definitive teaching by the Church in this matter, so should I avoid differential equations until the time the Church does receive revelation (please tell me yes!!! )?

Do you need all of zoology to be approved through revelation or only certain parts before you would be willing to learn from a specific professor?

Peace

Tim

 

[ricmat]

Now, if you had to learn about evolution, would you rather learn from a very humble Mother Teresa or a prideful Ken Miller?

Given only those 2, I’d go to Ken Miller I guess (I’m not sure who he is, but I’ll assume he is a famous evolution expert).

You seem to think that because somebody knows more than somebody else about a subject, that it automatically makes them correct. You know more about evolution than I do. Does that make you correct? What about the guy who knows more about evolution than you do, and disagrees with you. Does that make him correct?

 

[buffalo]

That was never the question. The question is straight forward: If you had to learn zoology, would you go to the humble Pope or the proud Dawkins (or substitute any other Ph.D. in zoology) to learn it?

Is humility more important than knowledge when it comes to teaching a subject? Would the Pope be a better zoology teacher even if he has very limited knowledge of the subject simply because he is humble?Again, that wasn’t the question, but, OK, so which part of differential equations has been revealed to the Church? I know of no definitive teaching by the Church in this matter, so should I avoid differential equations until the time the Church does receive revelation (please tell me yes!!! )?

Do you need all of zoology to be approved through revelation or only certain parts before you would be willing to learn from a specific professor?

Peace

Tim

If I want to be a zoologist I get trained by the zoologists. If the zoologists makes pronouncements that are philosophical he has stepped outside his own expertise.

If I want to learn theology I don’t go to Dawkins. He is uniformed and doesn’t study history. Dawkins is not reliable. If I want to learn something about zoology the Church might just know something about that too. (from the zoologists and perhaps her own Catholic zoologists.) You know the Church gathers truth and is not afraid of it. Dawkins is afraid of the truths of the church.

Where faith and reason meet is a very important intersect. The reasoning needs the (name removed by moderator)ut of both. The science builds to the reasoning. The final test is agreement by the Church which is always seeking truth.

At then end of the day we all should be able to “understand” more than each by itself.

 

[Orogeny]

Given only those 2, I’d go to Ken Miller I guess (I’m not sure who he is, but I’ll assume he is a famous evolution expert).

Good. Thank you.

You seem to think that because somebody knows more than somebody else about a subject, that it automatically makes them correct.

Do you ever go to the doctor for medical treatment or do you just self-medicate?

You know more about evolution than I do. Does that make you correct?

If I know more about evolution than you do, it makes it much more likely that I am correct than it is that you are correct when we are discussing evolution.

What about the guy who knows more about evolution than you do, and disagrees with you. Does that make him correct?

Most likely.

Did your professors in college know more than you? How did you know that they were right?

Peace

Tim

 

[buffalo]

Would you do the same for a class in differential equations?Do you trust medical doctors to make medical decisions without a joint pronoucement from the Pope and the bishops? I’m sorry, buffalo, but that is a bizarre requirement.

Peace

Tim

I would like a well trained doctor who believes in the sanctity of life vs a well trained doctor who could care less if I live or die.

 

[Orogeny]

If I want to be a zoologist I get trained by the zoologists.

Thank you. That wasn’t too hard, was it?

If the zoologists makes pronouncements that are philosophical he has stepped outside his own expertise.

Not part of the question.

If I want to learn theology I don’t go to Dawkins. He is uniformed and doesn’t study history. Dawkins is not reliable. If I want to learn something about zoology the Church might just know something about that too. (from the zoologists and perhaps her own Catholic zoologists.)

If the Church is silent about zoology and you needed to learn zoology, would you go to the humble Pope or to Dawkins?

Well, let’s go back to my other quest You know the Church gathers truth and is not afraid of it. Dawkins is afraid of the truths of the church.

Would you go to the Pope or to Dawkins to learn zoology? The other stuff is irrelevant to the question. You indicated that pride is a problem with educated people and I want you to tell me if you would learn from someone who is prideful but knows the subject matter or would you chose to learn from someone is humble but does not know the subject matter. I want you to state definitively that pride would or wouldn’t disqualify someone from being your teacher.

Where faith and reason meet is a very important intersect. The reasoning needs the (name removed by moderator)ut of both. The science builds to the reasoning. The final test is agreement by the Church which is always seeking truth.

Yes, but that is not the question. Would you go to an prideful differential equations expert to learn differential equations or would you disqualify him SOLELY because he is prideful?

Peace

Tim

 

[buffalo]

Thank you. That wasn’t too hard, was it? Not part of the question.If the Church is silent about zoology and you needed to learn zoology, would you go to the humble Pope or to Dawkins?Would you go to the Pope or to Dawkins to learn zoology? The other stuff is irrelevant to the question. You indicated that pride is a problem with educated people and I want you to tell me if you would learn from someone who is prideful but knows the subject matter or would you chose to learn from someone is humble but does not know the subject matter. I want you to state definitively that pride would or wouldn’t disqualify someone from being your teacher. Yes, but that is not the question. Would you go to an prideful differential equations expert to learn differential equations or would you disqualify him SOLELY because he is prideful?

Peace

Tim

No - I would not exclude a prideful person. I would question his conclusions if his pride would not allow him to come to a conclusion against his worldview.

It won’t be that hard to admit that pride can get in the way of reasoning, will it? Even if its just a smidgeon?

Just do it.

 

[grannymh]

It won’t be that hard to admit that pride can get in the way of reasoning, will it? Even if its just a smidgeon?

Just do it.

A smidgeon is good.

 

[Orogeny]

I would like a well trained doctor who believes in the sanctity of life vs a well trained doctor who could care less if I live or die.

Me too, but that wasn’t the question.

You see, buffalo, I take offense by your post regarding pride. I think that is a clear attack on people with an education (including myself since it was my post you were replying to) and it was both uncharitable and uncalled for.

I worked hard to get my meager education. I am proud of what I was able to accomplish but I am not a prideful person regardless of what others on this forum think, but you clearly painted me and everyone else with educations with a very broad brush.

I am not ignorant about science but some other posters on this forum are. Am I prideful to point out to them that they are wrong? Should I just ignore that which I worked hard to understand because some person insists that the earth is the center of the universe or that some quack from France decided to lie to people that don’t understand geology?

Am I prideful if I correct someone who is pro-abortion?

I consider you a friend so I will forgive that slight whether you meant it or not.

Peace

Tim

 

[ricmat]

If I know more about evolution than you do, it makes it much more likely that I am correct than it is that you are correct when we are discussing evolution.

But you also agreed below that somebody who knows more about evolution than you and disagrees with you would also be correct.

Most likely.

Both you, and the guy who knows more than you can’t have contradictory conclusions and both be correct.

 

[Orogeny]

It won’t be that hard to admit that pride can get in the way of reasoning, will it? Even if its just a smidgeon?

That is also the case for those who don’t have education but insist that they understand the many flaws in the theory of evolution or heliocentrism or the principle of superposition. Yet that wasn’t part of your accusation.

Peace

Tim