Thursday, April 16, 2009
Evolution: why does it really matter?
I think it's fair to say that most scientists "believe" in evolution, but looking at the big picture, why does evolution really matter? why is it important that we argue with those that oppose evolution? why has carroll written this incredible book that provides clear evidence in support of evolution?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think the main reason evolution matters is that the theory of evolution provides us with answers. We now know how life started and how we, as humans, became to be. Evolution provides us with a procedure for how to arrive at the conclusions we have today. As for the questions why we must argue those who oppose evolution, I believe that both sides are justifiable. The religious side believes more in faith while the scientific side believes more in reason. If arguing does occur, it is because one side wants the other side to understand their point of view. So, arguing about evolution just proves that the scientific reasons for the beginning of life are in question by others. This could be a possible reason as to why Sean Carroll wrote this book. Although, I feel that the reason behind writing this book is less of an argument, but more of an informative read. I believe that Sean Carroll has a genuine passion not just for the theory of evolution, but also all the work that went into developing that theory and that Sean Carroll probably wanted to show his passion in the best way he knew how, in the form of a book.
ReplyDeleteI think that the point of evolutionary research is the theme that knowing our past will help us prepare for our future. Knowing our evolutionary history will tell us how we came to be how we are today. The same processes that made us who we are today will be in effect to change us for the future as well. Therefore, by knowing how evolution work, we can know how we and other species will change in the future due to selective pressures. Knowing our evolutionary history also tells us what species we are related to. Using DNA research like LINES and SINES can tell us how closely related we are to certain other species. In addition, the processes used in evolution can be used by humans for our own benefit. For example, knowing exactly how the antifreeze gene evolved from a digestive enzyme could be useful if we have a similar enzyme and, for whatever reason, needed an antifreeze. therefore, studying the processes of evolution could perhaps even help us develop a kind of artificial evolution, where we mimic advantageous evolutionary processes to give us the advantageous trait. Knowing what species we are related to would also help us in this aspect, as similar species would have many of the same genes as we do, and we could use that knowledge to mimic advantageous evolutionary processes as described, because we would likely have the same materials needed for the evolution of the trait as the original species, since we are so related. Evolutionary research holds a lot of potential for the future.
ReplyDeleteI agree that most scientists believe in evolution, but it's also important to keep an open mind. Evolution is indeed only a theory. It is important to study evolution because understanding our origin and DNA helps us make scientific advances that could help us in areas of agriculture and treatment and prevention of disease. If we look at the adaptations of organisms to different selective pressures, we can find new ways to artificially recreate those adaptations to our benefit. But to answer your next question, it's important that we seek truth, and examine both sides. Carroll unfairly justifies evolutionary theory using examples of Christians who believe in evolution. On page 242, Carroll writes, "The General Assembly of the Presbyterian Chruch reaffirmed in 2002 that 'there is no contradiction between an evolutionary theory of human origins and the doctrine of God as Creator'" (Carroll 242). Although I do actually agree with this statement, Carroll uses this as evidence, while just a few pages later he says, "At best, then, intelligent design is a myth" (245). He clearly doesn't believe that the Presbyterians are correct, but he still uses their statement as justification. I personally believe that science and religion can be and should be studied together, to attain deeper understanding and seek truth. It is wrong to call another theory a myth, without fully investigating its justification.
ReplyDelete