Why must everyone think alike?

[Farnan]

I hear and see so much in the world of people of all views that believe if one does not agree with their beliefs they are evil/delusional/stupid. Can't we merely accept that people hold different beliefs? We can argue the merits of our beliefs, but does that require attacking the other? Must we suppress other ideas that don't agree with us? Don't people realise that without the oppossite idea, your idea does not advance?

Why do Christians believe they must try to force Atheists to be Christian and vice versa?

Why do Evolutionists believe they must make Creationists follow their beliefs and vice versa?

Why must Conservatives try to force Liberals to their side and vice versa?

Forcing does not simply mean physical force, but force by using ridicule and social isolation.

I'm a firm believer in this presented by John Stuart Mill:

http://www.bartleby.com/130/2.html

[Gaidin]

Why do Evolutionists believe they must make Creationists follow their beliefs and vice versa?

There is no belief regarding evolution. Only factually observed data.

[Farnan]

Still what affect does it hold on you if others disagree?

Are you not able to enjoy your dinner because you know somewhere out there there is a creationist? Do you lock your windows and doors for fear that a Creationist will come at you at night?

Creationism has done great things for the Theory of Evolution as it provided a counter-balance forcing evolutionists to back up their theory, to conduct great searches for evidence, to improve upon the theory.

[Gaidin]

Still what affect does it hold on you if others disagree?

Are you not able to enjoy your dinner because you know somewhere out there there is a creationist? Do you lock your windows and doors for fear that a Creationist will come at you at night?

Creationism has done great things for the Theory of Evolution as it provided a counter-balance forcing evolutionists to back up their theory, to conduct great searches for evidence, to improve upon the theory.

No they haven't. Scientists do that on their own when they try to find holes in the theory.

[Earl of Rochester]

Still what affect does it hold on you if others disagree?

Are you not able to enjoy your dinner because you know somewhere out there there is a creationist? Do you lock your windows and doors for fear that a Creationist will come at you at night?

Creationism has done great things for the Theory of Evolution as it provided a counter-balance forcing evolutionists to back up their theory, to conduct great searches for evidence, to improve upon the theory.

Evolution is the foundation for modern biology. Due to creationism in my state of Florida there is a new bill that basically gives teachers the right to ignore it. Fortunately for now the evolutionists are winning the debate, but there is a sizable minority that wants evolution out of schools. We are hardly taught it as it is. I remember skimming over evolution and not really learning anything. I here how come if we evolved from monkeys there are still monkeys? Anyone who has any knowledge in evolution could explain why this is not a valid question, but most people here don't really have any knowledge on the subject. Just that there religion says it is wrong.

Im fine with people having their own beliefs, but when it comes down to fundamental science and the teaching of that science there becomes a problem. Surely its not fine for a vast majority of the population to think the Earth is flat. Such ignorance MUST be fought.

[Dayman]

Still what affect does it hold on you if others disagree?

Are you not able to enjoy your dinner because you know somewhere out there there is a creationist? Do you lock your windows and doors for fear that a Creationist will come at you at night?

Well it affects us when they try and sneak ID into schools.

Creationism has done great things for the Theory of Evolution as it provided a counter-balance forcing evolutionists to back up their theory, to conduct great searches for evidence, to improve upon the theory.

This so much is true...and very utilitarian.

No they haven't. Scientists do that on their own when they try to find holes in the theory.

Actually Farnan is right. This sort of controversy forces a lot of people (not just scientists) to read up on evolution, it helps shore up ideas.

Ideas need to be challenged, even scientifically correct ones.

[Gaidin]

Actually Farnan is right. This sort of controversy forces a lot of people (not just scientists) to read up on evolution, it helps shore up ideas.

Ideas need to be challenged, even scientifically correct ones.

I was talking about scientific research. Not amateur debating about a subject we are not professionally trained in.

[Dayman]

I was talking about scientific research. Not amateur debating about a subject we are not professionally trained in.

Ok, but this is my point, and why I agree with farnan.

In general bad ideas should be allowed to exist because 1) they will go away on their own merit 2) we shore up our own ideas.

[Vladimir Lenin]

Why must Conservatives try to force Liberals to their side and vice versa?

Why must Conservatives and Liberals try to force Laissez-Faire Capitalists to conform to their ideals?

Personally I could care less if a community of communists or fascists or socialists or evangelical christians got together, so long as I was'nt forced to sink with the ship.

[Farnan]

So you mean all those expeditions would recieve the same amount of funding if there was no controversy?

[Gaidin]

So you mean all those expeditions would recieve the same amount of funding if there was no controversy?

Scientific research already ignores creationist rants.

Scientific research is based on specific questions raised by the theory, be they portions that aren't fully explained or just questions that were raised by the theory itself.

[MasterOfNone]

Sadly many in this thread display the very spirit the opening poster warns against.

If one cannot understand that evolution is a theory - not fact - then he has lost the whole point of the issue.

It is the spirit of tyrants to try and compel others to one's belief, and mockery is but a little behind it.

Good post, Man With No Name.

[Juvenal]

...If one cannot understand that evolution is a theory - not fact - then he has lost the whole point of the issue.
It is the spirit of tyrants to try and compel others to one's belief...

The usage of the word Theory in this context is often misunderstood by non-scientists.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory

In science, a theory is a mathematical or logical explanation, or a testable model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise falsified through empirical observation.

It follows from this that for scientists "theory" and "fact" do not necessarily stand in opposition. For example, it is a fact that an apple dropped on earth has been observed to fall towards the center of the planet, and the theories commonly used to describe and explain this behavior are Newton's theory of universal gravitation (see also gravitation), and the theory of general relativity.

In common usage, the word theory is often used to signify a conjecture, an opinion, or a speculation. In this usage, a theory is not necessarily based on facts; in other words, it is not required to be consistent with true descriptions of reality. This usage of theory leads to the common incorrect statements. True descriptions of reality are more reflectively understood as statements which would be true independently of what people think about them.

Evolution is the fact, Natural Selection is a conjecture for explaining how evolution occurs. Intelligent Design is another conjecture, justified by philosophical reasoning rather than empirical observation.

My natural tendency is with the OP, people can believe in what they like, but I must call a halt when this starts to impact on me and my children.

It is not the case that all opinions are equal, opinions that don't agree with observation are of lesser value and are sometimes actively dangerous. For example I would be very unhappy if my doctor prescribed leeches for my septicemia because he "believed" in the medieval theory of humours.

[Tiwaz]

Why...

Answer is simple.

Religions tend to come with builtin "missionary" requirement.

Go forth and make all people my disciples and stuff. That means preaching and trying to make others think like you.

Which on other hand annoys others immensly. I to this date have not met person trying to "save" me who I would have wanted to spend time with.

As countereffect for this religious pollution, atheists have taken active position and spread message of abandoning religion. Which again annoys religious people because preaching and annoying people is their right.


And thereby religion tries to attack science and reason because they are biggest guns in arsenal against religion. Your preaching really loses lots of credibility when scientist shoots holes size of solar system into your arguments.

[Farnan]

This is not a debate on evolution vs. Creationism, that was just an example.

[MasterOfNone]

The reason why evolution/creation, right to keep and bear arms/gun control, socialism/capitalism, religion/atheism topics keep on coming up is because there are two diametrically opposed viewpoints at work.

All of it boils down to just two positions.

I think that should be understood in the context of the thread.

[Dunecat]

All of it boils down to just two positions.

I am afraid you are mistaken.

Duality can almost never be used to describe existence.

[Pontifex Maximus]

I hear and see so much in the world of people of all views that believe if one does not agree with their beliefs they are evil/delusional/stupid. Can't we merely accept that people hold different beliefs? We can argue the merits of our beliefs, but does that require attacking the other? Must we suppress other ideas that don't agree with us? Don't people realise that without the oppossite idea, your idea does not advance?

Why do Christians believe they must try to force Atheists to be Christian and vice versa?

Why do Evolutionists believe they must make Creationists follow their beliefs and vice versa?

Why must Conservatives try to force Liberals to their side and vice versa?

Forcing does not simply mean physical force, but force by using ridicule and social isolation.

I'm a firm believer in this presented by John Stuart Mill:

http://www.bartleby.com/130/2.html

I'm not trying to convert anyone. *points to evangelicals* They be nuts.

[chriscase]

I think the "agree to disagree" line has some serious limitations.

Suppose, for example, someone sideswipes your (legally, safely) parked car. You demand his insurance information so you can file a claim with your insurance company and he denies there was an accident. You point to your damaged car and his damaged car, you bring in witnesses that saw him hit your car, etc. You are clearly in the right, and he is clearly in the wrong. But the other driver just shrugs and says "I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. You obviously have no tolerance for opinions other than your own."

When the "agree to disagree" line is used as the last resort of someone who is clearly in the wrong, it is not reasonable. There ought to be a fallacy named after it. Maybe there is...?

[ajm317]

Unfortunately what other people think affects me, and what I think affects them. Christian fundamentalists refuse to allow gay marriage, scientists insist on teaching evolution in biology class, liberals want gun control, conservatives don't, some see abortion as murder, some see abortion as a right and the purchasing habits of the population at large mean that when I turn on my radio all I hear is pop music and country.

The sad fact of the matter is that the best way to ensure that you live in a society that pleases you is to make it a society that pleases everyone, and the only way to do that is to make them think like you.