• Evolution has little causal evidence, making any unwavering belief in it as fact a faith-based judgment

    1) The proportion of species of organisms we have observed undergoing evolution in the current day is not statistically significant. There are over 8 million species of eukaryotic organisms alone on earth. A very small fraction, we're talking below 5,000, of those species have undergone evolution within the 150 or so years since Darwin created his theory. This is hardly statistically significant, making any claim to the universality of evolution unscientific at best.

    2) Correlation does not imply causation. Just because we observe results that would be in line with Darwin's theory and the modern theory of Evolution in the fossil record doesn't mean that Darwin's theory is the sole and absolute cause of the results. Unformitarianism is illogical, and currently widespread in science, making science itself suspect.

    Thus, what we have is an idea about causality, without any proof of causality, and statistically insignificant data to boot. Hence, any belief in Evolution as truth is a faith based belief.

  • I'm afraid so

    There is no evidence to support the hypothesis that small genetic mutations lead to any major difference between an organism and it's parents. I have yet to see a single piece of research that says this can happen. Evolution is a theory devoid of any scientific fact. Meanwhile, God creating everything is a theory that has never been disproven despite thousands of years of people researching it.

  • Yes it should.

    I believe evolutionism should be considered a religion as it's foundation is based off of a theory. Therefore, this makes it a religion. Technically, when we believe in any type of historical science, it takes faith. As faith is believing and standing strong by your beliefs. If people can't understand this, then I don't know what will help them understand. Also, many people try to claim creationism is a religion, therefore, if that were the case, evolutionism is a religion as well.

  • "Evolutionism" is certainly a religion. But a peculiar one.

    The only people who use the word "evolutionism" are creationists, who are mostly religious fundamentalists. Therefore "evolutionism" is an exclusively religious term.

    You never hear biologists refer to themselves as "evolutionists." It's only ever creationists who use that term. "Darwinism" is another religious label used by creationists. In fact, creationists have a lot of very exclusive terminology such as "Historical Science," which you will never see in a non-religious text.

    So in conclusion, "Evolutionism" (or Evilution, as it is sometimes referred to) has to be a religion, because you will never, ever, hear an atheist identify with anything other than the plain old Theory of Evolution of Species.

    Also, not understanding what a scientific theory means is also a religious practice in some cultures.

  • I do not Think it is a Religion in itself

    I quickly looked up the answer to this question and some people say yes while others say no. I do not think it can be considered a religion in itself, but it is a belief. Personally, I believe in Lutheranism, but I also adopt Evolutionism as fact. I can do this because Evolutionism doesn't exclude the idea of a god-like creator nor does it suggest that there is one. Whether you are Islamic, Christian, Buddhist, etc. you can adopt Evolutionism into your belief system because it does not severely intrude on your vital beliefs (as long as you don't adopt Creationism literally).

    Evolutionism is merely a set of beliefs that can stand alone if you are an Athiest or be included into your existing religious beliefs. I do not consider Evolutionism to be a religion unto itself, though.


  • Evolution isn't a religion because:

    A) it isn't a way of life. It is a belief that we build other theories on (all of which are very un-scientific by the way).
    And b) It doesn't focus on a deity or center of worship for men.

    A) Evolutionism is simply just a theory that explains what the world is and how it got here. If it is anything more or less than it isn't evolutionism. Even as a scientific theory evolutionism is a very ill-conceived idea, because a world with this much design all being caused by something of pure chance and random combustion? I don't think so.

    B) Evolutionism shouldn't be a religion because it denotes the idea of a creator or any deities in this world at all. It shows that man is nothing more than another animal evolving like the rest of the world. (again, untruthful)

  • Grasping at straws.

    Trying to equalize science and religion has been happening a lot on this website lately. People saying atheism and theism are both religions, and now, somehow, the laughable notion that a solid scientific theory has somehow magically been transformed into a faith based platform for spiritual well being. This is getting embarrassing. What's next? The Church of Geology?

  • Logically, no it is not

    The opposite of evolutionsm is creationism. Since we don't consider creationism a religion, but rather an aspect of one, it is logical that evolutionism wouldn't be either.

    Furthermore, a lot of religions religions aren't actually apposed to evolution(ism).
    --- The Catholic Church: Pope Pius XII stated in his encyclical Humani Generis (1950) that there was no opposition between evolution and the doctrine of the faith and that he considered the doctrine of "evolutionism" a serious hypothesis, worthy of investigation and in-depth study equal to that of the opposing hypothesis
    --- United Methodist Church: Petition 80050: accepts evolution and corrects some ambiguities under "Science and Technology" in the Book of Discipline.

  • Science isn't a religion

    Science isn't a religion. Religion requires faith to believe in it. Science requires empirical evidence And is peer reviewed. Faith is believing in something that has no evidence in it for being true. On one side theres evidence and on the other has faith. Therefore, science and religion are polar opposites.

  • Evolution is Not Religion

    Religion is based on faith. Evolution is based purely on physical evidence. This leads to objective, probabilistic conclusions. Vestigial organs and appendages are evidence of transitional evolution of divergent species. The arguments against evolution remain purely faith based, and ever receding in probability with each discovery.

    Evolution is a FACT! The only factor not completely understood is the origin of DNA replication. However, numerous purely scientific hypotheses exist that are currently in line with the physical evidence we have available -- unlike creationism.

  • It is a theory.

    A theory, by definition, is not a religion. A theory, like a religion cannot be proved, but the idea of a theory has scientific evidence that a religion does not have. A religion is not scientific. Evolution has scientific evidence.
    A theory, by definition, is not a religion. A theory, like a religion cannot be proved, but the idea of a theory has scientific evidence that a religion does not have. A religion is not scientific. Evolution has scientific evidence.

  • No. Not by definition.

    Religion is "the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, Especially a personal God or gods" (Dictionary. Com). By this definition, Evolutionism is not a religion because it denounces the idea of a supernatural God or gods. However, One may argue that evolution requires faith because we have only observed micro-evolution. Creationist often use this as a debating tactic designed to trip the Evolutionist up. They claim that it is a "secular religion" because it pushes norms and proper action. However, It is clear that the study of evolutionism is another branch of science. You do not see Creationists tediously examining microscope slides to prove there is a God (unless they want to show how "complexity" can prove a supernatural deity). No, Religion began as a group of people making up things based on their sloppy observations or moral value. Evolutionism, On the other hand, Began with Darwin's careful study. From there, It was studied further and further until general population began seeing the science behind it in the 20th century. The last point I would like to make is that evolutionism is not ridden with a moral code or values. Instead, It is completely about science and does not have any doctrines.

  • Evolution Has To Be FACT: In Science, For a Theory To Exist, It Must Start As A Fact::

    We knew Gravity as a Fact since the Beginning of Time, yet it wasn't until Newton that it had an Explanation attached to it. Every Theory in Science originates from a Fact: Because a Scientific Theory Is An Explanation Of A Fact" as opposed to a general social theory which is just an Idea.

    The Fact of Evolution was actually known of by some, before Darwin lived, even some historians consider that the supreme artist, engineer, designer, paleontologist and philosopher Leonardo da Vinci, had similar ideas from his notes on the fossils he collected from the sea.

    Darwin simply gave what he considered as a possible explanation for the Facts he researched. Though since he wrote his Theory (explanation) scientists have been challenging his theory with everything they can find and alas, they failed to defeat Darwin's Theory and gain a Nobel Prize for their efforts.

    When the science of Genetics arrived, Scientists thought, at last, we can defeat Darwin with this new discovery, but, again they failed, as Genetics only made Darwin's Theory Stronger and Added More Facts to the already extensive list of Facts that are under Evolution.

    So Evolution is not just 1 Fact, it encompasses many Facts.
    Evolution is thus the Strongest Theory In Science History.

  • Examine the "Yes" side of things.

    If you do, you will see one false dichotomy and one misunderstanding. However, you will see a grand total of 0 people giving a definition of evolutionism, followed by one of religion, and showing the match. (Accurate as of 25/02/14 16:26 BST) I suspect the "Yes" posters have lost their way off the forums.

    Besides, evolutionism doesn't exist. Trying make up a word because you cannot think of an appropriate phrase is lazy. It also is a direct link to religions, asserting a huge amount of pre-confirmed bias. Disappointing.

    However, as I do not have the BoP, here, I will simply - and humbly - await someone to actually post a supporting argument.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Buckethead31594 says2014-02-25T01:53:45.530
I once claimed it was when I was a religious bigot; merely out of insecurity too. Logically, it is no more a religion than creationism is.
Sagey says2014-02-26T01:16:59.847
Facts Of Evolution: Ancient civilizations knew how to breed dogs to gain different characteristics and had done it successfully for many thousands of years, as all dog breeds originated from wolves and these likely originated from the same origin as the wolverine, as dogs have vestigial dew claws and pads, as they once moved like wolverines. Same goes for breeding cat traits. These Fact and many other example of Vestigial organs/limbs are Facts of Evolution. Darwin's theory provided an answer to why humans were able to make such changes from wolves to dogs by their breeding strategies. Though he concentrated on other Evolutionary Facts, but the theory is applicable to all the Facts known.
Sagey says2014-02-26T01:47:52.943
BTW: On Leonardo da Vinci: Possibly one of the greatest minds ever to have existed: " Leonardo doubted the existence of a single worldwide flood, noting that there would have been no place for the water to go when it receded. He also noted that "if the shells had been carried by the muddy deluge they would have been mixed up, and separated from each other amidst the mud, and not in regular steps and layers -- as we see them now in our time." He noted that rain falling on mountains rushed downhill, not uphill, and suggested that any Great Flood would have carried fossils away from the land, not towards it. He described sessile fossils such as oysters and corals, and considered it impossible that one flood could have carried them 300 miles inland, or that they could have crawled 300 miles in the forty days and nights of the Biblical flood"
As it states: Leonardo was one of the world's first Paleontologists who realized that the Book of Genesis was wrong, he gave some of the first real insights into biology, geology and Evolution, with his examination and concepts on the fossil record.
He even derided those who believed in the Book of Genesis with: ""such an opinion cannot exist in a brain of much reason; because here are the years of their growth, numbered on their shells, and there are large and small ones to be seen which could not have grown without food, and could not have fed without motion -- and here they could not move."
So he derided Genesis believers in the same way we still do today.
Genesis believers haven't changed, they are still the most naive mob on the planet, then and now.
Sagey says2014-02-26T01:56:56.337
A final bit of information on how Insights from the Christian Artist, Geologist, Engineer, Paleontologist, Biologist, Aeronautics expert and first Evolutionist: Leonardo da Vinci's research and insight, helped lead to Darwin's theory of Evolution.
Enjoy :-D~

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.