Equivocation as a Tactic in the Evolution Debate – Discovery Institute

Photo: Eugenie Scott, by Sgerbic, CC BY-SA 3.0 , via Wikimedia Commons.

Writing at Evolution News, Casey Luskin points out that a survey, reporting that a majority of Americans now accept evolution, didnt address the real issue. That is because evolution is not adequately defined. A co-author of the study, Eugenie Scott of the National Center for Science Education, has been doing this for a long time.

See the following from Chapter One of my 2006 book, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design:

The many meanings of evolution are frequently exploited by Darwinists to distract their critics.Eugenie Scott recommends: Define evolution as an issue of the history of the planet: as the way we try to understand change through time. The present is different from the past. Evolution happened, there is no debate within science as to whether it happened, and so on I have used this approach at the college level.1

Of course, no college student indeed, no grade-school dropout doubts that the present is different from the past.Once Scott gets them nodding in agreement, she gradually introduces them to The Big Idea that all species including monkeys and humans are related through descent from a common ancestor.Darwin called this descent with modification, and it is still the best definition of evolution we can use.2

This tactic is called equivocation changing the meaning of a term in the middle of an argument.

Note that even Scotts best definition omits the real sticking point, namely that Darwinian descent with modification is (according to Darwin) unguided.

How many Americans accept Darwins belief that human beings are the result of an unguided, purposeless process? The survey doesnt come close to telling us.

Read more from the original source:
Equivocation as a Tactic in the Evolution Debate - Discovery Institute