10 ms·

Regarding evolution, I believe the denial of evolution is something characteristic for american evangelicals. Most other christian denomination either accept ev

by olavk 14y ago

Regarding evolution, I believe the denial of evolution is something characteristic for american evangelicals. Most other christian denomination either accept evolution or doesn't really have an opinion on it, and AFAIK it is not really a major discussion outside of the US.

facorreia 14y ago
As a Brazilian Catholic, that is my impression too. This supposed incompatibility is mainly perceived by Americans.
- rbanffy 14y ago
  Most Brazilian Catholics are a very pragmatic bunch. Most believe in reincarnation.
  - facorreia 14y ago
    True, but even if you take Brazil out of the picture, the Catholic position on evolution would probably be surprising to most Americans in the same way the OP was surprised about the position of the Reformed church. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_evolution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_evolution
lucian1900 14y ago
Christian Orthodox people are another group that oppose evolution strongly, but they have a tendency to be less vocal.
- entropy_ 14y ago
  Wait, do you speak of the Eastern Orthodox Church[1]? I'm middle eastern(Lebanese to be precise) and a very large segment of the Christian population here belongs to various Orthodox churches(Greek, Antiochian, Armenian and Syriac) and none of them, to my knowledge at least -- and I've talked to quite a few priests and bishops having worked as a missionary in Aleppo for a year -- deny evolution. I have never heard a single teaching in church(or outside of it by some church official) that denied evolution. In fact, those I've talked to who were versed on the subject usually treated evolution as fact. None of the whole "theory" hogwash. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Orthodox_Church http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Orthodox_Church
  - lucian1900 14y ago
    Yes, that's the one. At least all the ones I've met in Romania (and I've met quite a few) have tried to help me see the error of my ways and believe in the extremely literal interpretation of the creation myth as fact.
    - ovi256 14y ago
      While there is internal debate among Orthodox leaders about evolution, with both for and against camps, the Eastern Orthodox Churches have never published official opinions on scientific matters, including evolution, implying such matters are of no concern. To understand the above statement, one must know several facts about the Eastern Orthodox (from now on EO) faith: - In a phrase, the EO world is peer-to-peer. There is no leader, similar to the Pope. Each country's Church is autonomous (they use the term autocephalous), including in theological matters. When they meet, they meet as peers, and the Patriarch of Constantinople is recognized as the chairman of such meetings (primo inter pares, the first among peers or equals). The different Churches recognize each others' Orthodoxy, which stems from following the same theological principles, agreed some time ago during several Ecumenical Councils. Instead of EO Church, I should use EO Churches everywhere, and if I do not, it's a mistake. - The EO are very conservative on issuing theological statements. This stems from the conflict and fragmentation that rash statements have caused in the past, which have included millenia-long strife with the Catholic Church and various groups regarded as sects or heretical splinter churches. It does not help that the last Ecumenical Council to be recognized as valid by all EO was the Council of Nicaea of 787. Yes, that is not a typo. - The EO Churches regards material welfare with indifference, if not suspicion. They have strong ascetic traditions, at the extreme end ressembling nihilism, that underpin the faith and the recommended lifestyle. This attitude flows towards science as well. That is why we have not seen something similar to Islamic banking discussed among the EO. These concerns are so foreign, the EO faithful I've asked about similar things have been surprised I've thought faith could influence such a metter at all. - In stark contrast with American Evangelicals, the EO rarely, if ever, seek to influence state law or to seek enforcement of religious principles. AFAIK, the EO opinion is that a sinful action stopped by another still is a sin commited. - Evolution is not a hot issue in the EO countries. It looks to me like it's a hot issue only among the American Evangelicals, and the foreigners that share their faith. TL;DR So the Romanians that you have met were probably followers of dualism [1]: science can be incompatible with faith, and they exist in separate planes, which is a more complicated position than it looks, not dissimilar with doublethink. It would be wrong though to say this is the official EO position. For that to be true, dualism would have to be universal (or almost) among the EO faithful in all EO countries, and the next Council would have to ratify that position. That will not happen, IMO, before the heat death of this universe. Dualism is, AFAIK, popular among a minority, mostly the elderly faithful. FWIW, You would have to search hard for a dualist EO scientist or engineer. As for me, I'm a secular, not-very-observant, born EO, but I understand that Christian principles are foundational for European cultures, even in secular countries. My, was this a long reply. I felt the first statement would be hard to understand without its peculiar context. Edits: lots of typos, improvements. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution#Eastern_Orthodox_Church http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution#Eastern_Orth...
mhurron 14y ago
You might want to expand your world view. Stupid is not the unique domain of the US. http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/06/south-korea-evolution-education/ http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/06/south-korea-evolut... "The country’s [South Korea] anti-evolutionary sentiment appears to already be widespread within the schooling system, with a recent survey of trainee teachers in the country revealing half of those questioned disagreed with the statement that “modern humans are the product of evolutionary processes”.
- marquis 14y ago
  I've noted this phenomenon around the world in mostly English-speaking countries, where it appears to have historically been derived from American Evangelism, due to access to certain literature, films and song (i.e. culture). South Korea, I imagine, has had a lot of input from the U.S.
- olavk 14y ago
  Who said it was stupid? Evangelicalism is one of the fastest growing Christian denominations AFAIK, so arguably it is a quite successful belief. Of course it is unscientific, but that is a different issue. It might be smart to deny science depending on what you want to achieve. I don't know much about religion in South Korea, but I would assume that the denialism is due to American influence, since it seems to be a recent phenomenon (according to the article). Jehovas Witnesses is another world-wide movement that denies evolution, and it also originated in the US.
  - rbanffy 14y ago
    > It might be smart to deny science depending on what you want to achieve. This is not the kind of smart I'd like to be promoted. I'd prefer people being set free by the truth, not to be enslaved by fairy tales.
    - antidoh 14y ago
      Calling it fairy tales is never, ever going to get that side of the argument to converse in any manner better than defense. Engagement would be better. Some very, very smart people believe exactly the way you wish they wouldn't.
mynameishere 14y ago
I'm yet to meet anyone who denies evolution. It's actually a product of strawmanism, which is absolutely an American political habit.
- planetguy 14y ago
  Shrug. They're out there somewhere, though I have yet to meet one either. > strawmanism, which is absolutely an American political habit I'm sure you could delete the word "American" from that sentence and it would be just as accurate.
- alinajaf 14y ago
  They totally exist. My dad (an Epidemiologist by trade) didn't believe in evolution. He also wouldn't agree that gravity is the force that holds celestial objects in orbit around each other. People can be funny like that...
  - joering2 14y ago
    Your dad is a good man. I still don't believe in evloution. Supposedly we are related to monkeys in 98% genetically wise, but yet monkeys still have their children. They don't give birth to human. Further, just because something is similar doesnt mean that one come from other. Look at silver and gold molecules-wise. As of gravity, we still not sure what causes it and how it actually works. We can't re-create it, we just assume how it works.
    - floomp 14y ago
      Assuming you're serious, please, please research how evolution works. Evolution doesn't predict that a species will spontaneously give birth to another similar species - really the opposite, in fact. Almost all people who "deny" evolution do so because they've been misled about what it means.
      - LeafStorm 14y ago
        > Almost all people who "deny" evolution do so because they've been misled about what it means. If they deny evolution as a natural process whereby mutations advantageous for survival are propagated, then yeah, they probably don't understand it. (The GP certainly doesn't.) But just because you accept evolution as a process doesn't mean you have to believe it is the origin of all biological diversity on Earth. It certainly doesn't mean you have to become an atheist.
alinajaf 14y ago
As a species we haven't had that long to get used to the idea. I hope sincerely that we will have all the denial out of our system in a few hundred years time.
TazeTSchnitzel 14y ago
It's not really the denial of evolution, it's the selective denial of the scientific community's ability to understand the world. Especially where it would be inconvenient.
seanmcdirmid 14y ago
This is very uninformed and related to a US-centric view of the world: there is plenty of ignorance and opinions to go around outside of the states. The issue is only so visible in the states because we are so divided, go to other countries outside of the 1st world/Europe and consensus is often toward creationism; there is not much controversy.
- esbwhat 14y ago
  I agree the fact that it's very hotly debated in the US is part of what makes the US such an infamous example of this irrationality, but I would say the fact that the US is a scientifically advanced first world country definitely also contributes to why this is a phenomenon to so many people. Third world countries don't exactly have the best education system. The US (even though it gets a lot of slack) still has a comparably very good one, that should reach beyond "god put us on the earth with magic, the end". And it does reach beyond that, the whole "teach the controversy" is an eccentricism of an otherwise science-based curriculum.
lotharbot 14y ago
> "I believe the denial of evolution is something characteristic for american evangelicals." It's pretty easy to trace the history of this belief. In the late 1800s, a movement sprang up primarily in the US called "Liberal Christianity", which at its most extreme treated the Bible as essentially a useful and unreliable fairy tale. In response to this, a countermovement called "Christian Fundamentalism" arose, which at its most extreme treated the Bible (typically King James Version) as completely literal and completely perfect, and viewed any study of external data (like manuscripts or culture) with great suspicion. Fundamentalism became fairly influential in American Evangelical circles, even among those who did not explicitly adopt the title Fundamentalist. As a result of the rise of Fundamentalism, the idea of a literal six-day creation becameentrenched in the US, which directly led to the rejection of the theories Darwin had recently proposed regarding speciation. When I say the literalist belief became entrenched, I do not mean to say it was nonexistent before, only that it was rare. Various non-literal understandings of the creation account can be found throughout Christian history. For example, Augustine's treatise on Genesis 1 [0] is quite allegorical. [0] http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf101.toc.html http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf101.toc.html - from where the word "Genesis" first appears on the page, down to where the list of names starts, you can click through to read each individual paragraph/section.

by olavk 14y ago

facorreia 14y ago

As a Brazilian Catholic, that is my impression too. This supposed incompatibility is mainly perceived by Americans.

rbanffy 14y ago
Most Brazilian Catholics are a very pragmatic bunch. Most believe in reincarnation.
- facorreia 14y ago
  True, but even if you take Brazil out of the picture, the Catholic position on evolution would probably be surprising to most Americans in the same way the OP was surprised about the position of the Reformed church. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_evolution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_evolution

lucian1900 14y ago

Christian Orthodox people are another group that oppose evolution strongly, but they have a tendency to be less vocal.

entropy_ 14y ago
Wait, do you speak of the Eastern Orthodox Church[1]? I'm middle eastern(Lebanese to be precise) and a very large segment of the Christian population here belongs to various Orthodox churches(Greek, Antiochian, Armenian and Syriac) and none of them, to my knowledge at least -- and I've talked to quite a few priests and bishops having worked as a missionary in Aleppo for a year -- deny evolution. I have never heard a single teaching in church(or outside of it by some church official) that denied evolution. In fact, those I've talked to who were versed on the subject usually treated evolution as fact. None of the whole "theory" hogwash. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Orthodox_Church http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Orthodox_Church
- lucian1900 14y ago
  Yes, that's the one. At least all the ones I've met in Romania (and I've met quite a few) have tried to help me see the error of my ways and believe in the extremely literal interpretation of the creation myth as fact.
  - ovi256 14y ago
    While there is internal debate among Orthodox leaders about evolution, with both for and against camps, the Eastern Orthodox Churches have never published official opinions on scientific matters, including evolution, implying such matters are of no concern. To understand the above statement, one must know several facts about the Eastern Orthodox (from now on EO) faith: - In a phrase, the EO world is peer-to-peer. There is no leader, similar to the Pope. Each country's Church is autonomous (they use the term autocephalous), including in theological matters. When they meet, they meet as peers, and the Patriarch of Constantinople is recognized as the chairman of such meetings (primo inter pares, the first among peers or equals). The different Churches recognize each others' Orthodoxy, which stems from following the same theological principles, agreed some time ago during several Ecumenical Councils. Instead of EO Church, I should use EO Churches everywhere, and if I do not, it's a mistake. - The EO are very conservative on issuing theological statements. This stems from the conflict and fragmentation that rash statements have caused in the past, which have included millenia-long strife with the Catholic Church and various groups regarded as sects or heretical splinter churches. It does not help that the last Ecumenical Council to be recognized as valid by all EO was the Council of Nicaea of 787. Yes, that is not a typo. - The EO Churches regards material welfare with indifference, if not suspicion. They have strong ascetic traditions, at the extreme end ressembling nihilism, that underpin the faith and the recommended lifestyle. This attitude flows towards science as well. That is why we have not seen something similar to Islamic banking discussed among the EO. These concerns are so foreign, the EO faithful I've asked about similar things have been surprised I've thought faith could influence such a metter at all. - In stark contrast with American Evangelicals, the EO rarely, if ever, seek to influence state law or to seek enforcement of religious principles. AFAIK, the EO opinion is that a sinful action stopped by another still is a sin commited. - Evolution is not a hot issue in the EO countries. It looks to me like it's a hot issue only among the American Evangelicals, and the foreigners that share their faith. TL;DR So the Romanians that you have met were probably followers of dualism [1]: science can be incompatible with faith, and they exist in separate planes, which is a more complicated position than it looks, not dissimilar with doublethink. It would be wrong though to say this is the official EO position. For that to be true, dualism would have to be universal (or almost) among the EO faithful in all EO countries, and the next Council would have to ratify that position. That will not happen, IMO, before the heat death of this universe. Dualism is, AFAIK, popular among a minority, mostly the elderly faithful. FWIW, You would have to search hard for a dualist EO scientist or engineer. As for me, I'm a secular, not-very-observant, born EO, but I understand that Christian principles are foundational for European cultures, even in secular countries. My, was this a long reply. I felt the first statement would be hard to understand without its peculiar context. Edits: lots of typos, improvements. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution#Eastern_Orthodox_Church http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution#Eastern_Orth...

mhurron 14y ago

You might want to expand your world view. Stupid is not the unique domain of the US. http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/06/south-korea-evolution-education/ http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/06/south-korea-evolut... "The country’s [South Korea] anti-evolutionary sentiment appears to already be widespread within the schooling system, with a recent survey of trainee teachers in the country revealing half of those questioned disagreed with the statement that “modern humans are the product of evolutionary processes”.

marquis 14y ago
I've noted this phenomenon around the world in mostly English-speaking countries, where it appears to have historically been derived from American Evangelism, due to access to certain literature, films and song (i.e. culture). South Korea, I imagine, has had a lot of input from the U.S.
olavk 14y ago
Who said it was stupid? Evangelicalism is one of the fastest growing Christian denominations AFAIK, so arguably it is a quite successful belief. Of course it is unscientific, but that is a different issue. It might be smart to deny science depending on what you want to achieve. I don't know much about religion in South Korea, but I would assume that the denialism is due to American influence, since it seems to be a recent phenomenon (according to the article). Jehovas Witnesses is another world-wide movement that denies evolution, and it also originated in the US.
- rbanffy 14y ago
  > It might be smart to deny science depending on what you want to achieve. This is not the kind of smart I'd like to be promoted. I'd prefer people being set free by the truth, not to be enslaved by fairy tales.
  - antidoh 14y ago
    Calling it fairy tales is never, ever going to get that side of the argument to converse in any manner better than defense. Engagement would be better. Some very, very smart people believe exactly the way you wish they wouldn't.

mynameishere 14y ago

I'm yet to meet anyone who denies evolution. It's actually a product of strawmanism, which is absolutely an American political habit.

planetguy 14y ago
Shrug. They're out there somewhere, though I have yet to meet one either. > strawmanism, which is absolutely an American political habit I'm sure you could delete the word "American" from that sentence and it would be just as accurate.
alinajaf 14y ago
They totally exist. My dad (an Epidemiologist by trade) didn't believe in evolution. He also wouldn't agree that gravity is the force that holds celestial objects in orbit around each other. People can be funny like that...
- joering2 14y ago
  Your dad is a good man. I still don't believe in evloution. Supposedly we are related to monkeys in 98% genetically wise, but yet monkeys still have their children. They don't give birth to human. Further, just because something is similar doesnt mean that one come from other. Look at silver and gold molecules-wise. As of gravity, we still not sure what causes it and how it actually works. We can't re-create it, we just assume how it works.
  - floomp 14y ago
    Assuming you're serious, please, please research how evolution works. Evolution doesn't predict that a species will spontaneously give birth to another similar species - really the opposite, in fact. Almost all people who "deny" evolution do so because they've been misled about what it means.
    - LeafStorm 14y ago
      > Almost all people who "deny" evolution do so because they've been misled about what it means. If they deny evolution as a natural process whereby mutations advantageous for survival are propagated, then yeah, they probably don't understand it. (The GP certainly doesn't.) But just because you accept evolution as a process doesn't mean you have to believe it is the origin of all biological diversity on Earth. It certainly doesn't mean you have to become an atheist.

alinajaf 14y ago

As a species we haven't had that long to get used to the idea. I hope sincerely that we will have all the denial out of our system in a few hundred years time.

TazeTSchnitzel 14y ago

It's not really the denial of evolution, it's the selective denial of the scientific community's ability to understand the world. Especially where it would be inconvenient.

seanmcdirmid 14y ago

This is very uninformed and related to a US-centric view of the world: there is plenty of ignorance and opinions to go around outside of the states. The issue is only so visible in the states because we are so divided, go to other countries outside of the 1st world/Europe and consensus is often toward creationism; there is not much controversy.

esbwhat 14y ago
I agree the fact that it's very hotly debated in the US is part of what makes the US such an infamous example of this irrationality, but I would say the fact that the US is a scientifically advanced first world country definitely also contributes to why this is a phenomenon to so many people. Third world countries don't exactly have the best education system. The US (even though it gets a lot of slack) still has a comparably very good one, that should reach beyond "god put us on the earth with magic, the end". And it does reach beyond that, the whole "teach the controversy" is an eccentricism of an otherwise science-based curriculum.

lotharbot 14y ago

> "I believe the denial of evolution is something characteristic for american evangelicals." It's pretty easy to trace the history of this belief. In the late 1800s, a movement sprang up primarily in the US called "Liberal Christianity", which at its most extreme treated the Bible as essentially a useful and unreliable fairy tale. In response to this, a countermovement called "Christian Fundamentalism" arose, which at its most extreme treated the Bible (typically King James Version) as completely literal and completely perfect, and viewed any study of external data (like manuscripts or culture) with great suspicion. Fundamentalism became fairly influential in American Evangelical circles, even among those who did not explicitly adopt the title Fundamentalist. As a result of the rise of Fundamentalism, the idea of a literal six-day creation becameentrenched in the US, which directly led to the rejection of the theories Darwin had recently proposed regarding speciation. When I say the literalist belief became entrenched, I do not mean to say it was nonexistent before, only that it was rare. Various non-literal understandings of the creation account can be found throughout Christian history. For example, Augustine's treatise on Genesis 1 [0] is quite allegorical. [0] http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf101.toc.html http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf101.toc.html - from where the word "Genesis" first appears on the page, down to where the list of names starts, you can click through to read each individual paragraph/section.