 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / January 2007When words just don't serve
>From my most recent Encyclopaedia Britannica newsletter: "Today the concept of evolution is a pillar of the biological sciences and infuses almost all of modern culture. But it continues to be challenged by some conservative religious believers, who insist that evolution is a theory that does not explain all there is to know about creation." The sun was shining on the sea, Shining with all his might: He did his very best to make The billows smooth and bright-- And this was odd, because it was The middle of the night. The moon was shining sulkily, Because she thought the sun Had got no business to be there After the day was done-- "It's very rude of him," she said, "To come and spoil the fun!" Last I heard, the theory of evolution was the great antidote for any theological theory of creation. -- Franke: EFL teacher & medical editor Native speaker of American English; posting from Taiwan. "This knowledge of the non-freedom of the will protects me from losing my good humor and taking much too seriously myself and my fellow humans as acting and judging individuals," Albert Einstein. http://tinyurl.com/yc9zzq >Last I heard, the theory of evolution was the great antidote for any >theological theory of creation. Not to mention an antidote for silly displays of grief at funerals.  SignatureSteve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk > >From my most recent Encyclopaedia Britannica newsletter: > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > evolution is a theory that does not explain all there is to know about > creation." [...] > Last I heard, the theory of evolution was the great antidote for any > theological theory of creation. There's great virtue in that "some". Rather shocking that our iconic encyclopedia dares not come out with "a few" or "a rump". Likewise "conservative": that's true, too, but it covers an awful lot of ground. I wonder if they slipped "creation" in there on purpose or by oversight. And a scientific description "that does not explain all there is to know" about something? Wow, surprise me again! They'd probably have got a better formulation for their paragraph if they'd given the job to a modern theologian. SignatureMike. > >From my most recent Encyclopaedia Britannica newsletter: > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > ><snip> Hard to believe the EB newsletter contains such poorly prepared material. Apparently, the phrase "concept of evolution" is being used to mean "Darwin's theory of evolution". There's nothing 'theoretical' (to use the term as a layman would) about the fact that evolution occurs -- we see it everyday in the living world. The theoretical aspect is in whether Darwin's understanding of _how_ evolution occurs is correct or not. The idea that a very few, vocal, anti-Darwinists can become, to the EB, "some" conservative religious believers is a promotion that is unwarranted and misleading. Really, the quoted paragraph reads like it was extracted from some fundamentalist propaganda. Since the EB is usually pretty good about separating the partisan from the provable, perhaps this isn't really from the EB newsletter. Hmmm? --mirage > > >From my most recent Encyclopaedia Britannica newsletter: > > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > partisan from the provable, perhaps this isn't really from the EB > newsletter. Hmmm? Or to put it into the words of a RR: "And as is so often the case, you get what you pay for." Regards, Igor > > >From my most recent Encyclopaedia Britannica newsletter: > > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > partisan from the provable, perhaps this isn't really from the EB > newsletter. Hmmm? I don't think you need to worry. The sentence does not at all strike me as if it was "extracted from some fundamentalist propaganda." It looks like quite a fair description of the state of human affairs -- that although evolution is a central pillar, etc, etc, there some some people who persist in challenging it. That's all. In the English language, "some" does indeed include "very few," and it doesn't say anything about their reliability or knowledge. The article is a polite and necessary tip of the hat to the existence of the detractors, without implying they are well-informed. If you think this is passage is itself extremist, I can only think you haven't seen the extremist stuff. By the way, I see the use of the word "insist" as a subtle tip that the Britannica does not approve. People who have no evidence can only insistently repeat themselves. SignatureBest wishes -- Donna Richoux |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.