Kim asks:

> Is a belief in evolution really needed to understand technology, biology,
>  and science today ?

You use the word "belief," but scientists don't "believe" in evolution in the
same sense that a devout churchgoer believes in the existence of an unseen
god whose very being is unprovable, whose will is unknowable, and whose presence
is unsensible.

Rather evolution is a process as fundamental to the nature of the universe as
is the rusting oxidation of iron in an oxidative atmosphere or the falling of
a rock in a gravity well. Its effects are as easy to measure and the process
is as highly intelligible. Moreover the process is repeatable. A thousand
people working in isolation from one another would come to the same basic
conclusions regarding its processes.

There is no "belief" involved.


>  To invent things (dvd, computers, ect) is that belief needed ?
>
>  To create new drugs to fight cancer, aids, etc, is that belief needed ?
>
>  To understand how the planets work, cells work, our body works, is that
>  belief needed ?
>
>  Has biological/medical/etc research benefited from this belief ?
>
>  Does its belief contribute to our understanding of empirical science today?

The answer is absolutely yes, although it is just as clearly true that an
individual person could live out his or her life in total ignorance, believing
that a Windows PC was created by God -- or the Devil -- depending on the
teachings of his particular sect, and not be greatly affected by that ignorance. But
as a society, a profound understanding of the universe as it truly exists is
fundamentally essential to health and well-being to the civilization. We can't
all be fools. If we were, we wouldn't be a civilization.

You use the word "empirical" as if it were just a random process, bumbling
around in the dark, where we stumble here and there blindly, occasionally
finding something that works and retaining that memory for future use.

In a real sense, that's exactly what the evolutionary process is: empirical
discovery, using your sense of the word. But that isn't exactly what people
mean by empiricism. Empiricism is an organized body of knowledge, where every
step is verified and verified again by experiment, and thus made distinct from
the Platonic, Aristotlean and Pythagorean forms of discovery. Every scientist is
an Ionian empiricist, and as a result, walks around with a pound of Missouri
dirt in his pockets. The state motto of Missouri is "Show Me," and that's all
that every scientist demands of one another. Demonstratable, repeatable proof.
Nothing is taken on faith or belief.

Nor is science partitionable. There is only one body of knowledge. Everything
makes sense in the context of the whole, or nothing makes sense at all. If we
can't explain the evolution of solar systems and the evolution of cells in a
completely cohesive manner, where every intermediate step is demonstratable
via experimential verification, then we aren't explaining anything. All we are
doing is inventing fairy tales.

Wirt Atmar

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *