Evolution help!

[MartyMcFly]

I am currently taking an Environmental Biology class which is required for my general education requirements. In the first class the Professor has already stated

1. That human beings are NOT more intelligent than humans
2. Evolution is fact and should be taught as such
3. There is historical evidence that our descendants considered the WOMAN to have the roles that are now associated with men, and vice versa.
4. Our thinking faculty is just a function of chemical reaction in our brains.

I foresee this semester to be a constant debate.

Can anyone direct me to any resources that would be of help this semester.
This would include philosophical and scientific resources.

Additionally, Does anyone know what DOGMATICALLY a Catholic must believe in regards to the Creation account in Genesis? I remember hearing that a Pope put out an encylical on this topic.

 

[Orogeny]

I am currently taking an Environmental Biology class which is required for my general education requirements. In the first class the Professor has already stated

1. That human beings are NOT more intelligent than humans

I don’t think that is what you meant to write.

1. Evolution is fact and should be taught as such

He is correct. The mechanisms of evolution are the subject of the theory of evolution and are constantly debated in the scientific world. However, evolution itself is a fact.

1. There is historical evidence that our descendants considered the WOMAN to have the roles that are now associated with men, and vice versa.

Don’t know what that has to do with environmental biology. It may or may not be true (probably was in some cultures), but I don’t know the context he made the claim in.

1. Our thinking faculty is just a function of chemical reaction in our brains.

Scientifically, that is true.

Peace

Tim

 

[VociMike]

I am currently taking an Environmental Biology class which is required for my general education requirements. In the first class the Professor has already stated

1. That human beings are NOT more intelligent than humans

I certainly agree with that!

1. Evolution is fact and should be taught as such

This statement should be judged by scientific criteria. If true, it is no threat to the Catholic faith.

1. There is historical evidence that our descendants considered the WOMAN to have the roles that are now associated with men, and vice versa.

Yes, there’s lots of evidence that men had babies and women hunted mammoths. Can’t argue with that.

1. Our thinking faculty is just a function of chemical reaction in our brains.

I’d say he’s claiming much more than the evidence supports at this time. But if true, so what?

I foresee this semester to be a constant debate.

Debate about what? That man has a supernatural side as well as a natural side? While true, that doesn’t seem to be a part of the course. I would just challenge him if he claims that there is no supernatural side to human beings, since he is claiming something that evolutionary biology (or any other science) does not teach, and cannot teach.

Additionally, Does anyone know what DOGMATICALLY a Catholic must believe in regards to the Creation account in Genesis? I remember hearing that a Pope put out an encylical on this topic.

Humanae Generis

 

[DustinM]

1. That human beings are NOT more intelligent than humans

Human beings are humans. We are exactly as smart as us.

1. Evolution is fact and should be taught as such

Evolution is a fact and a there is a theory to explain. (Similar to gravity, and the theory that explains it.)
talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html

1. There is historical evidence that our descendants considered the WOMAN to have the roles that are now associated with men, and vice versa.

a) Like what?
b) Who cares?

1. Our thinking faculty is just a function of chemical reaction in our brains.

It is. Our thinking faculty is not the same thing as a soul, or anything like that.
Our thinking faculty may assist in having spiritual experiences, in which case the chemical reaction relates to the spiritual.
But God is all about relating the spiritual to the physical world. No problem there.

I foresee this semester to be a constant debate.

Why? Perhaps this is a good opportunity to learn about the real theory of evolution. (If you don’t currently accept evolution, you’ve probably not learned it at all, or you perhaps learned a straw-man version of it.)

Can anyone direct me to any resources that would be of help this semester.
This would include philosophical and scientific resources.

Talk Origins. Start with the Index to Creationist claims. They have a few examples of why belief in God and evolution are not contradictory there.
talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html

Additionally, Does anyone know what DOGMATICALLY a Catholic must believe in regards to the Creation account in Genesis? I remember hearing that a Pope put out an encylical on this topic.

Some Catholics are Bible literalists, and many are not. Bible non-literalism is at least 1600 years old with Saint Augustine writing about how Genesis specifically was allegorical.

 

[tobinatorstark]

I for one reject evolution and believe everything your prof said is false. However the belief of Evolution it isn’t dogmatic that we believe or not believe evolution. We are free to believe what we want to this subject. As stated before I reject evolution and will never accept it, just there are many here that do accept evolution and they have will never change their POV either. As far as scripture, we are to accept scripture. Some see Genesis as a literal interpretation of creation like I do. Creationism isn’t dogmatic either, I believe, correct me if I am wrong. But accepting the Bible itself and its contents is a whole different topic. I am not looking to debate anyone weather Evolution is a theory or fact or not. My Catholic school didn’t teach evolution and we taught creationism through Genesis. I accept creationism and I also accept those who freely accept evolution

 

[chaz0426]

Like other poster’s on here, Evolution or any scientific theory is no threat to the Catholic faith. As long as you believe that God created all the matter we currently see and everything composed of it and it’s natural laws we observe in science. Evolution in my opinion was just a means or scientific way of how God created us over time. The bible even said that his time is not our time, the sense of time doesn’t apply to God.

The fact is, we are here as we are now whether by evolution or not. Your teacher is mostly correct on a lot of those claims since it can be proven and demonstrated scientifically.

However it makes no threat to faith unless you are a Bible literalist, many of which are ignorant to scientific principals and laws ( no offense to anyone ). Not that they are stupid, just simply ignorant or not understanding them or were never exposed to them.

Same reason why we all believed the world was flat at one time( some rare people still do! ).

The thing is science doesn’t make any claim as fact unless it is proven so.

It’s been proven that our brain is comprised of neurons and chemical messengers that compose our thoughts.

So what? I personally believe that matter and everything to our reality is all created by God. If our thoughts are made up of chemicals and neurons, so what? God created that. It’s simply a means of how we can interact in this world/dimension confined to physical laws and matter. If our skull was hollow or our bodies just plain water or emptiness, how much sense would that make to the scientific world?

The thing that is important and to which you should challenge is if he denied the existence of the supernatural and if science somehow tries to explain or prove the non-existance of the supernatural or spirit which is what athiests base their faith on.

Such things can neither be proven to not exist nor proven to exist and probably never will which is why so much faith and trust is required unless God intentionally makes his revelations known someday.

Science is the religion of athiests.

However to me as a faithful catholic who has a lot of scientific knowledge, science is just a means to explain the observable for the betterment of man kind. Not a religion. Many things in Science are true as many things have been proven false too later on. Science is the product of manifestations of the thoughts of man based on the observable reality we live in and is not meant to explain God although it often tries to do so.

the fact that our material world and the spiritual world are entirely different things. Whether they are dimensions, realities or such, we may never know. The fact is God created everything as it is, the Big Bang wasn’t just a random spark.

Even though our brain is linked to our thoughts and is composed of matter, the soul is not. Science can never explain the existence of the soul or the supernatural since it is way out of this reality and our comphrehension since it is God’s knowledge and means. You just have to have faith that is what is the case as I do. Sometimes it’s tough since you don’t see any evidence or visual things to base that on unless you see ghosts but as for me I just have a sense or that feeling in my heart that is the case.

( I’m studying to be an Engineer so I have a good amount of scientific knowledge )

 

[MartyMcFly]

What I meant to say was he said

1. Human beings are not more intelligent than other animals

And the point with the thinking faculty being only a product of the chemical reaction in our brains, I believe Aristotle dealt with that problem.

Since reality is composed of matter and form there must be something immaterial forming the brain to act as it does.

Otherwise we would be able to put the chemicals that make a brain in a jar and created a human mind.

 

[hecd2]

What I meant to say was he said

1. Human beings are not more intelligent than other animals

Well, it depends to a certain extent on what one means by intelligence, but by most definitions of intelligence, this is a false statement. Did your prof really mean this?

Alec
evolutionpages.com

 

[VociMike]

What I meant to say was he said

1. Human beings are not more intelligent than other animals.

Ask him how many non-human animals teach the subject he teaches.

 

[reggieM]

In the first class the Professor has already stated

Pretty typical of the evolutionist’s desire to shock people (attention-getting device) because they want to get rich and famous like Richard Dawkins.

1. That human beings are NOT more intelligent than animals

Not surprising to hear that. It’s provides some good insight on the evolutionary mind-set. They can’t see the difference between human beings and animals – and therefore reduce the human person to the level of the animal.

1. Evolution is fact and should be taught as such

This is part of the deception. Before defining the term “evolution”, the professor claims that it is “a fact”. Of course, depending on how you define the term, the statement is either true or false. Again, typical of the evolutionist’s deceptive tactics.

1. There is historical evidence that our descendants considered the WOMAN to have the roles that are now associated with men, and vice versa.

In the first class, toss the feminist and gay agenda in for more shock appeal.

1. Our thinking faculty is just a function of chemical reaction in our brains.

There is no evidence showing the evolutionary path of human consciousness. This is more deception for the sake of sounding like he’s smarter than everyone else.

Can anyone direct me to any resources that would be of help this semester.
This would include philosophical and scientific resources.

There are many excellent resources out there that expose the false ideas of evolutionism.

Does anyone know what DOGMATICALLY a Catholic must believe in regards to the Creation account in Genesis? I remember hearing that a Pope put out an encylical on this topic.

This page offers a good summary:

What Does The Catholic Church Teach about Origins?

 

[Namesake]

Not surprising to hear that. It’s provides some good insight on the evolutionary mind-set. They can’t see the difference between human beings and animals – and therefore reduce the human person to the level of the animal.

Humans are animals. What else?

This is part of the deception. Before defining the term “evolution”, the professor claims that it is “a fact”. Of course, depending on how you define the term, the statement is either true or false. Again, typical of the evolutionist’s deceptive tactics.

Deception? Evolution is a fact. The Catholic Church agrees that evolution is almost certainly the way things happen. You could look it up.

There is no evidence showing the evolutionary path of human consciousness. This is more deception for the sake of sounding like he’s smarter than everyone else.

Check out the research at Tufts University. Lots of amazing research in the area you say has no evidence.

There are many excellent resources out there that expose the false ideas of evolutionism.

If there are such excellent resources available why aren’t they published in peer reviewed scientific journals?

 

[reggieM]

Humans are animals. What else?

Overwhelmingly more and infinitely different.

If there are such excellent resources available why aren’t they published in peer reviewed scientific journals?

Peer-Reviewed & Peer-Edited Scientific Publications Supporting the Theory of Intelligent Design

By the way, what are your scientific credentials?

 

[tobinatorstark]

Deception? Evolution is a fact. The Catholic Church agrees that evolution is almost certainly the way things happen. You could look it up.

Please provide a church document to support your statement. Evolution isn’t dogmatic by the Catholic Church

 

[DustinM]

What I meant to say was he said

1. Human beings are not more intelligent than other animals

Human are animals, but if he’s saying that we’re not more intelligent than other animals, I believe he is incorrect. Not all animals have the same level of intelligence (a dolphin is much smarter than an ant).
It is possible he was wrong on this particular point. College professors are a great source of knowledge, but that doesn’t mean they are always correct.
It is also possible he simply misspoke similar to how your first post was mistyped.

And the point with the thinking faculty being only a product of the chemical reaction in our brains, I believe Aristotle dealt with that problem.

Since reality is composed of matter and form there must be something immaterial forming the brain to act as it does.

Otherwise we would be able to put the chemicals that make a brain in a jar and created a human mind.

Aristotle lived thousands of years before we even knew what chemicals are. His views on certain things are going to be understandably dated.
Your brain largely functions as a series of chemical interactions. These interactions do not define who you are as a person in a philosophical sense, but to say that thoughts are not related to chemical reactions in your brain at all is false.

 

[buffalo]

As Catholics we must believe Adam and Eve are our first parents, Eve came from Adam, they had and lost bodily immortality, freedom from suffering and irregular desire, and infused knowledge.

 

[DustinM]

Peer-Reviewed & Peer-Edited Scientific Publications Supporting the Theory of Intelligent Design

I bet you were hoping we wouldn’t actually click the link weren’t you? Either that or you *actually think *that a university’s newspaper counts as scientific literature!

That list also includes something written by Behe who is a laughing stock amongst the scientific community. He admitted in a court of law that in order to include intelligent design as science, you’d have to stretch the definition of science to also include astrology!

 

[mchale]

I know a few people have answered this already, but I will throw in my answers.

I am currently taking an Environmental Biology class which is required for my general education requirements. In the first class the Professor has already stated

1. That human beings are NOT more intelligent than animals

This could only be considered true if you redefine intelligence. When one considers the fact that our intelligence is one of the characteristics that allowed our success as a species, it is hard to see how anyone can claim that other animals that have at best rudimentary tools can be considered as smart as humans on average.

1. Evolution is fact and should be taught as such

Its not good science to claim that Evolution is a fact; it is still a theory (theory being a much stronger word in science than in general usage) and always will be. It is however one that is strongly supported by the evidence. However, results in science always remain tentative pending more data; it is possible, in the future, that some evidence could be uncovered that would support an alternate theory of the development of life.

1. There is historical evidence that our descendants considered the WOMAN to have the roles that are now associated with men, and vice versa.

1. This is not biology; it is paleo-anthropology.
2. It is likely true that there might have been some cultures in the past where men and women’s roles were somewhat different than what we tend to traditionally assign to men in women in the pre-modern period. That being said, if anything, men and women were even more tied by biological necessity in the paleolithic era than they were at later dates.

1. Our thinking faculty is just a function of chemical reaction in our brains.

Biologically, this can be regarded as true. I tend to prefer to think of my brain and its chemical reactions as more of an interface for my soul with the material world. However, considering the necessity in Catholic doctrine for the unity of the soul and the body and the ultimate resurrection of the Body on the last day, it is certainly not inconsistent to say that our brains form an important part of our minds.

I foresee this semester to be a constant debate.

Can anyone direct me to any resources that would be of help this semester.
This would include philosophical and scientific resources.

Additionally, Does anyone know what DOGMATICALLY a Catholic must believe in regards to the Creation account in Genesis? I remember hearing that a Pope put out an encylical on this topic.

We ultimately must believe that God created the Universe and everything in it; we are free to believe in evolution as a description of how life developed on earth and even as to how the Human body developed. We however must accept that our souls are a special creation and that somehow we are descended from Adam and Eve.

–
Bill

 

[Sideline]

I am currently taking an Environmental Biology class which is required for my general education requirements. In the first class the Professor has already stated

1. That human beings are NOT more intelligent than (animals)

If he said this, exactly that way, then he is wrong.

If he said that there are many types of intelligence, and some animals are better than humans at certain cognitive tests, then he is right.

Remember that game “Simon Says” where the player has to imitate a pattern? A group of primatologists found that Gorillas were better at it than humans.

1. Evolution is fact and should be taught as such

Well, it is. The current species that we see on earth evolved from other species. All apes share a common primate ancestor, all primates share a common mammalian ancestor, all mammals share a chordate ancestor.

Just happened that way. There will be several people telling you it is completely false, but the evidence is squarely on the side of evolution. I’d suggest that you really learn about all the evidence for evolution before fighting against something that has been so well observed.

1. There is historical evidence that our descendants considered the WOMAN to have the roles that are now associated with men, and vice versa.

Ancestors, when they come before you, they are called ancestors. Descendants come afterwards.

You are going to be a lot more specific. All this is really saying is that different cultures are different. That’s by definition true. To critique this in anymore specific a way, I’d have to know his precise claims and look a the evidence.

There are places in the world now where gender roles are different than in North America.

1. Our thinking faculty is just a function of chemical reaction in our brains.

Do you have evidence to the contrary? Do you know of any thoughts that we have that don’t show up as chemical processes in the brain?

He can’t prove that there isn’t anything else to the human faculty, but there is no evidence there is anything else either.

 

[Sideline]

Its not good science to claim that Evolution is a fact; it is still a theory (theory being a much stronger word in science than in general usage) and always will be. It is however one that is strongly supported by the evidence. However, results in science always remain tentative pending more data; it is possible, in the future, that some evidence could be uncovered that would support an alternate theory of the development of life.

I agree that scientists shouldn’t use the word “fact”, but wouldn’t you agree that evolution is as much “fact” as most everything else we call a fact?

We call gravity a fact, we say photons are facts. In so far as these are fact, evolution is also fact.

It strains credulity that there would be another explanation that would explain the evidence better.

 

[reggieM]

I bet you were hoping we wouldn’t actually click the link weren’t you?

Ok, I will bet you $50,000 …