zodiac13 Oct 2005

For the gazillionth time, it fits the theory because the theory was made to fit the circumstances. Take the following circumstances:
- a dishwasher explosion,
- Wonder Years re-runs,
- prison gang-rape,
- the 1984 Olympic games,
- water on Mars.

A good scientist can make a theory that incorporates and explains all of these phenomena. Let's call this theory "Jimboism". If a slightly dim person studies Jimboism, she'll be astonished that dishwashers, re-runs, gang-rape, the 1984 Olympics, and water all act UNFAILINGLY according to this theory. She'll tend to credit the dishwasher, etc, with an extra importance, with some magic synchronicity. None of these things deserve that, the scientist does. Do you see yet?

You'd have done better to say (as you almost have) that calling faith, etc, a product of evolution is important because it relieves you of responsibility for faith. Not only can you be excused for trying to be faithless and then rushing desparately back to God, but you know that people who try not to have faith ARE IN FACT UNNATURAL AND ACTING AGAINST THEIR NATURE. And some other cool evolution-produced traits fall into the same category! Like,
- Killing in self-interest,
- Stealing from non-relations to provide for your genetic line,
- Eating fatty foods if you're a woman,
- Being vain and appearance-centered if you're a man or woman,
- Being horny and desperate if you're a man or woman.

So hey, that IS pretty useful! But wait, wasn't there a point in history where evolution made pre-humans have grasping toes for a specific purpose related to survival of the species? And don't we NOT have grasping toes now? So doesn't that mean that characteristics "made by evolution" - even including faith, reproduction, and fat-eating - can become non-essential or obsolete, and therefore our own responsibilities again?

Judges' ruling: NO SCORE FOR YOU.