0
What brought the conflict between the teaching of the theory of evolution and religious fundamentalism to the public's attention?
Wiki User
∙ 13y ago
Besides the scientific conflicts which defy evolution... (if you need more info. on this Google intelligent design), it is impossible to believe both evolution and The Bible which says the plants were created before the sun. There could not be a huge gap between the two. Accepting evolution not only offends those who like proof of their scientific theories before declaring them fact, but also offends those who don't pick and choose which parts of the Bible are to be believed when the text is plainly stated. By the way there is much more evidence for the Biblical model than macro evolution. Most dating programs assume linearity over time and most fossilization process models don't take into account the possibility of extreme pressure over short periods of time. (Results of Mt. St. Helen eruption produced petrified wood in short time).
Wiki User
∙ 15y ago
Wiki User
∙ 10y agoMost variants of religious fundamentalism have this belief in common: that a creator specially created humans and all other modern lifeforms as they are now, not very long ago. Evolution and evolutionary theory showed this to be false: most modern lifeforms didn't exist a few million years ago, but evolved from lifeforms that did exist back then. Since many religious fundamentalists were and are unwilling or unable to reconcile their beliefs with scientific findings, conflict was inevitable.
Wiki User
∙ 9y agoThe conflict was whether to continue understanding the Creation (Genesis ch.1) literally, or to reinterpret it much more broadly, which might dilute many religious principles and traditions. See also:
http://religion.answers.com/controversy/is-there-evidence-against-evolution
http://judaism.answers.com/jewish-philosophy/can-you-prove-that-god-exists
Wiki User
∙ 13y agoProbably the ' Scopes monkey trial ' of 1925. Google it!
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What happened at the Scopes trial and what made people refuse to believe in evolution?
The Scopes trial was about a teacher seeking to bring issues surrounding the teaching of evolution to the attention of a wider audience. Although he succeeded in this, he lost the trial itself and was fined $100. The law challenged by Scopes was the Butler Act, explicitly prohibiting the teaching of science thought to conflict with scripture - ie. evolution. This law was instated by Tennessee governor Austin Peay, for the usual reasons. It wasn't until 1967 that this particular law was successfully challenged and subsequently repealed.
How is evolution harmful to humans?
Evolution is a process by which organisms pass slowly and by degrees to a different stage or state; those organisms most suited to their environment advance and become more dominant, while those which don't 'keep up', or 'measure up' - in other words, don't survive as successfully - gradually disappear, or lose their contra-survival characteristics and evolve into a more successful strain.If humans have a major predator and that predator evolves to become a better predator, then the evolution of that predator is harmful to humans. But humans will develop new survival characteristics and strategies to deal with such threats; over time it balances out.Humans have no major predators in the higher animal kingdom; there do exist creatures which occasionally kill or injure us, but we aren't usually their natural prey; our most important predators are microscopic organisms such as viruses and bacteria.We can develop our own immune systems to cope with these as they develop more efficient ways to attack our immune systems. More visibly, our researchers constantly work on new ways to block these tiny predators, as well as on new ways to fight their adverse effects on us.The little predators have predators of their own, which evolve with them in a constant effort to beat them.So, we cannot say that evolution is harmful to humans; the pendulum swings both ways, back and forth, and keeps swinging all the time.Of course, like all scientific theories, the concept of evolution is frequently at odds with religious groups and other scientific groups who believe there is no such thing. Fundamentalist Christians, for example, believe that the entire earth was created as it now is in a few days by a supreme entity, and that it has remained and will remain just the same forever.Given this conflict, which can involve powerful and influential political factions within churches - not just Christian churches - it might do you little good to chat cheerfully about evolution if you live and work in a community where the dominant church and its scientists demand people (not simply the church's own members) reject the concept of evolution in favour of whatever that church believes to be true.In that situation, evolution could prove in some ways harmful to you as far as career prospects and a peaceful life are concerned, but such fundamentalist communities are pretty rare and easily avoided.
What is the Summary of the village washer?
How is the conflict resolved?
Why do people so readily accept the Theory of Evolution?
There are a number of possible answers to this. First: Evolution is taught as fact, even though some scientists (not creationists) have their doubts about aspects of it. Second: Somewhat related to this, there is the regular use of what could be called 'fuzzy terminology' where any change in an organism is termed as evolution, when it is merely variation within the pre-existing genetic make-up of an organism. Changes certainly occur, for various reasons such as environmental pressures, but for evolution to occur there must be new genetic information which did not previously exist. The use of careless terminology means that everything is viewed as evidence for evolution - it is seen as happening all around us and those who wish to use more scientifically accurate terminology are branded as holding 'fixity of species.' Third: There are those who have a philosophical agenda. Communists, beginning with Marx, stated that evolution was the scientific basis for his political philosophy. It must be stated here that by far the majority of scientists who accept evolution today are not communists. Some have said, however, that evolution is part of a naturalistic, humanistic, even atheistic world view, and that creation 'must not be allowed to get a foot in the door.' Fourth: Many people do not and cannot possibly live with certain philosophical conclusions derived from the theory, such as "ultimate meaninglessness." So, even though they hold evolution to be true scientifically, they hold various forms of Christian and Biblical morality which are not consistent with an evolutionary worldview. What some tend to do is to say that evolution is no threat to belief in an Almighty Creator God and they hold theistic evolution which states that 'God used evolution.' Fifth: For those who have rejected God, evolution seems to provide a justification for this choice. Thus evolution, in which nothing can be either moral or immoral can in some cases support certain personal choices. Sixth: There are those who would claim a purely rationalistic/scientific justification, 'on the basis of the evidence.' It is not the place here to cast doubt on the sincerity of such claims. The only thing that could be noted is that there are people who claim to reject evolution on purely scientific grounds. Those who insist they have a purely rational reason for their decision seem most aggressively devoted to it and less willing to discuss any possible scientific objections which is suggestive of something non-rational.
What are two main types of conflict?
Internal and External
What brought the conflict between the teaching of evolution and religious fundamentalism to a head?
The conflict between the teaching of evolution and religious fundamentalism was brought to a head primarily due to the theory of evolution challenging literal interpretations of religious texts, particularly regarding the origin of life and humans. This conflict was further fueled by the growing influence of scientific advancement and education, as well as the rise of fundamentalist movements seeking to defend traditional religious beliefs.
What are the two outcomes for evolution?
Life as we have seen it, as we now see it, and as (hopefully) we will see it. The other outcome is a lot of a conflict in the scientific and religious communities.
What is the theme of Inherit The Wind?
The theme of "Inherit the Wind" revolves around the clash between fundamentalism and free thought, as seen through the lens of the Scopes Monkey Trial. The play explores issues such as the conflict between faith and science, the importance of freedom of speech and thought, and the need for open-mindedness and tolerance in society.
What has the author Elizabeth Knauss written?
Elizabeth Knauss has written: 'The conflict' -- subject(s): Fiction, Fundamentalism
Why is theistic evolution a widely accepted theory?
Technically, theistic evolution isn't a theory. It's a religious belief. It's a belief that's widely held because many people feel that accepting the scientific theory of evolution does not conflict with their theistic beliefs.
What is the evolution controversy?
The controversy regarding evolution is the debate about the validity of the scientific model sparked by the inability of various religious groupings to reconcile this scientific teaching with their religious views. This controversy is not a scientific one, but exists solely in the minds of those who would seek to suppress the teaching of scientific models that conflict with their beliefs.
What does the social-conflict approach draws attention to?
what does the social conflict draw attention to? Patterns of social inequality
Does Evolution have to be conflicted?
If you are referring to the theory of evolution in terms of how it is believed to work in practice then yes, there is conflict. 'Nature red in tooth and claw' is an analogy used to describe the practical implications and operation of 'survival of the fittest.' There is seen to be, in the operation of natural selection, a struggle for survival in which the 'most fit' survive. This conflict is seen as necessary for evolution to progress.If you are referring to conflict between the theory of evolution and those who believe in either young-earth Biblical creation or Intelligent Design, then yes, there is also conflict here. This arises because the science of evolution contradicts the religious interpretation of some groups.If you are referring to the conflict between some facts of science and the theory of evolution, then this is perfectly explained by such facts being misinterpeted to suggest evolution is incorrect or impossible. This conflict arises from the above.If you are referring to the conflict within evolutionary science itself: this conflict is not over the fact that evolution occurs - this is accepted by almost all of the scientific community - but on how it occurs; for example, between gradual evolution and punctuated equilibrium, or between different opinions on the classification of certain species.
The 1925 trial of john scopes reflects the conflict between?
It was a clash between the public school system and the Christian community that believed that the theory of evolution to be heresy, in conflict with the Bible. The public school system representing a body of government challenging the Christian community's efforts to control what could be taught in public school based on their religious beliefs.
Religious conflict in Nigeria causes and solution?
Religious conflict in Nigeria is caused by differing philosophies and the inability to compromise their ideals. Changing social and economic problems in Nigeria can help relieve some of the religious conflict.
How did Akbar successors religious conflict in the empire?
By ending his policy of religious toleration.
Whose theory of evolution conflict with Darwin's theory of evolution?
Lamark's theory perhaps. Acquired characteristics clash with heredity.
