Figuring out "truth" is much like working a jigsaw puzzle without knowing what the end result is supposed to be. It's a challenging exercise from the start, but it's made far, far more difficult by our cognitive biases.
The only really effective way to work a jig saw puzzle when one doesn't know the end result is to let the the pieces already placed inform the attempted placement of each subsequent piece and then constantly update one's speculation about the end result with each successful or failed attempt. Becoming too rigid about what the end result might look like based on personal biases (as the religiously-minded usually do and as even scientists sometimes do) stalls progress. If the puzzle is actually a barn but you're absolutely convinced that it's supposed to be an airplane (because "God" told somebody thousands of years ago that it's an airplane), then you'll never work the puzzle. Ever. Rather, you'll actively resist placing pieces that make it look increasingly like a barn. And yet you'll never be able to arrange them in such a way that anything remotely like an airplane begins to take shape.
This type of intractable confirmation bias is the root cause of most human conflict--religious conflict, political conflict and even scientific conflict. Take as an example the debate between proponents of creationism and evolution. There are literally millions of puzzle pieces of evidence suggesting that speciation is a consequence of evolution by natural selection, and all these pieces generally fit together remarkably well (though not yet perfectly). Geology, ice cores, genetics, fossils, anatomy, etc. all suggest strongly that evolution by natural selection resulted in divergent species.
The puzzle isn't perfectly clear yet, there are definitely unanswered questions, and many puzzle pieces remain to be placed, but ever since Darwin first articulated his theory of evolution by natural selection, literally millions of once-scattered pieces have fallen neatly into focus. No other theory has proven capable of organizing so many pieces into a cohesive picture. And no evidence has been uncovered to date that conclusively contradicts the idea of speciation via natural selection.
Despite the fact that Creationism is no match for evolution when it comes to placing puzzle pieces, creationists resist. Even the most knowledgeable creationists (Michael Behe, for example) admit that their Creationism, or intelligent design, can't currently explain the evidence in the way that evolution can. Rather, they simply insist that an evolutionary understanding of the evidence is inaccurate and incomplete and that pieces that appear very well to go together actually don't (and that we'd understand that if we only knew what God knows). In other words, they insist that what appears very, very much to be a barn isn't a barn at all but is instead an airplane. This anti-barn and pro-airplane stance isn't anchored in observation (they readily admit that the developing picture LOOKS more like a barn than an airplane) but rather in simple confirmation bias.
A tell-tale sign that you may be suffering from confirmation bias is your ability to poke tiny holes in the argument of your opponent without being able to fully articulate a cogent alternative argument of your own. Creationism certainly meets these criteria.
I've found my most memorable moments not when I've felt that I've figured out a puzzle, but rather when I've forgotten that there was ever a puzzle to begin with.
I question creationism. I was brought up a roman catholic and I just want to believe, but it is hard with all the holes! Self- Enlightenment states you and everyone is GOD, I have a hard time wrapping my head around that also. I guess I am just Bi-Polar and am all over the place!
https://steemit.com/life/@davebrewer/do-you-know-where-to-look-for-proof-of-a-god
STEEM On !!
Dave
"Since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—His eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse."
@sean-king, I believe in God, but it's obvious that we are evolving. Just look at we are from 100 years ago, but I don't think we evolved from creatures to man.
Another deep post this morning and a lot to take in. Steem On you lucky bastard.
https://steemit.com/life/@davebrewer/do-you-know-where-to-look-for-proof-of-a-god
STEEM On !!
Dave
This is so true. A lot of my family "reject" evolution. They can't give any coherent reasons as to why and to be honest I just don't even bother discussing it anymore. It is strange to me that otherwise rational people can be hold such an irrational belief.
Very interesting to read. I actually had a very intense fight with one of the people closest to me because she used exactly the argument you brought up for creationism: the theory of evolution has flaws and is not perfect. To me that is simply incredibly closed-minded. Anyways, keep up the good work!
Great article! My family thinks people that believe in evolution are satanists. My grandpa used to stand in front of my work and wait for me to get there, just to hand me some new creationism pamphlet.
They are Satanists.
I knew it!
I come from a religious family and have a similar analogy to this, it's so true though that regardless of the fact nobody really knows anything, their baseless argument is still better than yours because God and the bible said God
Must be God then. QED.
https://steemit.com/life/@davebrewer/do-you-know-where-to-look-for-proof-of-a-god
STEEM On !!
Dave
Anyone who will tell you that they know how we came to be, is infected with confirmation bias.
We do not know what this reality is.
What if the creator itself talks about evolution... The world was not created in 7 days, but has a much older history... May b the creator is wrongly identified, or grossly misunderstood...
When looking at Biblical text in terms of the Creation, people are often prone to detaching the first 6-10 chapters from the rest of the writing. This is then followed by various attempts to interpret what the text might be saying, without any reference to other portions of Genesis, or any of the other books.
In literary interpretation, this method is extremely flawed, as it ignores any following context or any continuity which may follow (Much like reading only the first chapter of a novel, then trying to interpret everything the chapter says, without referring to what is said later on in the book). This method of understanding a text applies to the Bible as well.
We have a simple question - According to the Bible, how long did the creation take?
Genesis states it happened in 7 24h days. This however has been argued against for various reasons. Therefore, to reach the answer, we need to look later on in the book to find if there are references back to the Creation's duration. One of the first references we can find is in Exodus, when God states the 10 Commandments. The 4th Commandment states:
"Remember the day of the holy Sabbath. Six days shall you labour, and do all your work; But the seventh day is the Shabbath of Yahuah Elohayka (or the Lord your God, depending on the version)............. For in six days Yahuah made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day; wherefore Yahuah blessed the day of Shabbath, and hallowed it."
This is a point in the texts where the Creator himself uses the duration of the Creation as justification for a regular cycle. This limits the possible interpretations which can be taken in regard to the duration of the 7 days. They cannot be 7 long periods of time, due to the logical extension which is made by the Creator later on.
I tried to keep it short... I'm sorry if the post became too long XD
Indeed. Or maybe the creator was himself/herself/itself created, and so on and so on.
Very good job
"The goal isn't to live forever, the goal is to create something that will.”
I totally agree. To assert ones self in life should not be influenced by other people. Our own education and discovery is what shapes us and gives us autonomy as well as it leads to people to enjoy life and step back and watch in awe as they complete the 'jig saw puzzle'
think about this...... it is all THEORY nothing proved or duplicated in same conditions minimum twice in order to be confirmed into the areas of science ...
Yep. But working a puzzle without a cogent theory is damn near impossible.
agreed, YOU decide which theory you are willing to believe.
The truth is that we can not fully understand everything in this world, and people will always want to sell what they believe in to you as the best. we learn every day to know the truth in other to differentiate lies from truth. we must to learn and b e objective in our argument. being bias when discussing issues will make not to learn from others as you will think that your opinion is superior. you did a nice work. Weldon.
i m like
i voted you for this great post nice to read it
Great writing man! It is very common for a person to get a thing done in its own way without caring much about other's perspective BUT really difficult to do just the opposite :)
I don't think the two concepts are mutually exclusive. If you actually read the Bible, it really isn't that specific on how anything was created, it just says that it was created. I don't see why if an all-knowing deity created something, they wouldn't put a process in place for that creation to adapt/evolve to a changing environment. In fact, to me it's a much more plausible explanation. After all, if God created the earth to change over time through temperature fluctuations, natural disasters, etc. it would only seem rational that God would also allow his living creations to change over time as well. Taking it a step further, I don't think the Big Bang Theory excludes the possibility of a deity existing either. Thoughts?
Creationists and ID proponents do not reject the adaptation mechanism. They reject the proposition that this mechanism links all forms of life in the world. Rather, they support the idea that different forms of life are able to adapt to their environment, but the morphological changes are limited by the genetic codes. So, a wolf can turn into a bulldog over time, through selection, but it will not turn into a dolphin, due to the lack of genetic coding.
As always you have some great posts buddy, keep em comming!
Interesting subject.