Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: CREATIONISTS



Speaking of theories; a lot of talk has been about evolution being ONLY
a theory and not a law. Am I mistaken in my notion that laws and
theories address things in fundamentally different lights. A law just
says "this happens" whereas a theory makes some attempt to provide
explanation or causation. e.g. a LAW of fluids would say that they run
downhill. Theories of fluids would begin to propose underlying
causation. Almost every single student in my high school and junior
college classes believe that a law is a theory that has been adequately
proven (sort of a promotion in the philosophical world). I am one of
few people Ihave ever heard express this attitude and I know this group
is not one to be shy about telling me I'm full of it, soo..........am I?

In everyday english when something is called a theory it means that it
hasn't been proven. For example, somebody not quite sure about the
advice they are about to give opens up with "well, theoretically ....".
The fact that english and scientish use the same words with different
meanings gives lots of problems and other theories ("the THEORY of
relativity") often get scorned in the same way as "the THEORY or
evolution".