Evolution vs Creationism Essay Example for Free

Evolution vs Creationism Essay In the history of science vs. religion there has been no issues more hotly debated than that of evolution vs. creationism. The issue is passionately debated since the majority of evidence is in favor of evolution, but the creation point of view can never be proved wrong because of long standing religious beliefs. Human creation is seperated into three simple beliefs; creation theory, naturalistic evolution theory, and theistic evolution theory. The complexities of all three sides create a difficult dilemma for what theory to support among commom people, religious or non-religious. The theories of human evolution tend to always cause a heated dispute in modern American society. Each theory presents its own evidence proving its acceptance, but lacks enough evidence to prove the other theories incorrect. All the theories that attempt to explain human existence fall under the categories of creation theory, naturalistic evolution theory, and the theistic evolution theory. The creation theory explains that a certain God, or Gods created the humans, and evolution does not exist. The naturalistic evolution theory states that evolution is driven by purely natural forces, and is not controlled by any input from a god, goddess, or multiple deities. The theistic evolution is a mixture of both creation and naturalistic theories. The theistic evolution theory states that god created the world and guides the evolution process (Religious Tolerance, 2004). The information presented in evolution studies must be viewed with an open mind since there is no definite proof or law of evolution. The dilemma boils down to science vs. religion. God has been viewed as our creator by different societies for thousands of years, but the discoveries of recent science are suddenly questioning the origins of our existence. With new discoveries, scientific theories may prevail over religious theories. Until science proves its naturalistic theory correct, the world will have to choose between the three theories based on personal beliefs, religious values, and scientific information. The creation theory includes over 500 different creation stories based on numerous religions (Religious Tolerance, 2004). The vast number of stories creates strains on which evolution story is accurate. Christians that are creationists take their holy texts literally and believe the earth is around 10,000 years old. The creation theory will always exist with religion, so the creation theory can never be proved wrong since it is simply a religious belief. Religion is still very important in the United States, and the acceptance of the naturalization theory would completely change Christianity all together. Religious Tolerance, a website that outlays the conflict of evolution vs. creationism, explains how naturalism would shake Christianity. Religious tolerance states that the acceptance of evolution would make people interpret Genesis symbolically and classify evolution stories as myths. Since the creation stories are closely tied to the fall of man and to original sin, the entire role of Jesus would change. Without original sin, there would be no need for a savior, and Christianity would change drastically. This further proves that the creation theory will live as long as religion. The Gallup Organization studies what percentages of Americans believe in each of the three theories. 44% of Americans believe in the creation theory (Religious Tolerance, 2004). The naturalistic and theistic theories of evolution were unheard of until about 200 years ago. With modern science, popularity is growing between these two theories. Naturalistic evolution is built on Darwins ideas of natural variation and selection and Mendels model of genetic inheritance (Steen, 2001). Darwin and Mendel both could not explain how evolution occurs, but recent studies have shown evolution does occur by observing the evolution of fruit flies, and the Tilapia fish (Religious Tolerance, 2004). Scientists argue that observing human evolution is nearly impossible because the past 2000 years have proved little, and relying on fossils leads to many interpretations. Even though naturalistic evolution raises many questions, the theory also has many established facts. General acceptance of creation science would mean that the entire foundational structure and inner relationships of many sciences (geology, biology, astronomy, nuclear sciences, etc. ) become meaningless, and would have to be abandoned (Religious Tolerance, 2004). The naturalistic theory incorporates many aspects of the sciences into its proof. If creation science is somehow proved correct, the sciences are useless. Specification is the newest theory of evolution. Specification is having members of a population adapt to their environments to better suit themselves, and the members will pass this trait on to the future members. Ian Steward of New Scientist states, Specification is a complex business, taking place over vastly different scales of size and time. There is no reason to suppose that it is governed by just one force-after all, we know that genetic mutations and sexual recombination of existing genes vie with environmental influences, depletion of resources, parasites, migration and disease he maths indicate that far from being a surprising phenomenon, it would be very odd if specification didnt occur. Strictly based on science, evolution would follow the naturalistic theory. The naturalistic theory falls behind on the popularity of creationism and theistic evolution in the United States because of religion, the questions raised by the legitimacy of fossils, and the simple fact that the evolution of humans occurs over a period of time inaccessible to humans. (Steen, 2001) According to the Gallup Organization, 99% of scientists believe in the naturalistic theory while only 10% of the U.  S. population believes in the theory. A theory with growing popularity is the combination of the creation theory and the naturalistic theory. Theistic evolution theory supporters believe that evolution is controlled by God. Many Religious institutions teach that evolution was under Gods control and guidance. Even Pope John Paul 11 is intrigued with recent discoveries stating, Today, more than a half century after this [Human Genesis] encyclical, new knowledge leads us to recognize in the theory of evolution more than a hypothesis he convergence, neither sought nor induced of results of work done independently one from the other, constitutes in itself a significant argument in favor of this theory [of evolution] (Religious Tolerance, 2004). The popes decision to consider the recognition of evolution is based on many discoveries and theories including the intelligent design theory. The intelligent design theory for the most part is a more sophisticated version of creationism. Dr.  Meyer (director of the center for science and culture at the discovery institute) outlays the intelligent design theory stating, The current evolutionary theory cannot explain how new animal forms developed in the distant past. It advocates the theory of intelligent design, which holds that biological systems are so complex that they could have arisen only through the action of an intelligent force and not through purely random evolutionary processes (Monastersky, 2004). Dr.  Meyers statement in support of the intelligent design theory states that natural evolution could not have developed humans because we are too intelligent. The theistic view shows some aspects of religion and supports substantiate information yet does not jump to conclusions over unproved evidence. The Gallop Organization reports that 39% of Americans have a theistic view on the topic of evolution (Religious Tolerance, 2004). The naturalistic evolutionary theory will continue to gain ground on creationism as time goes by and further information is found and proved. I predict that the theistic evolution theory will become the most popular theory in the United States and around the globe. The concept of religion in peoples heads will never let natural evolution be proved or accepted. The creationism theory and the theistic evolution theory will survive as long as religion. Evolution vs. creationism is in fact science vs. religion, and no theory will ever be unanimously accepted until either religion or science is totally abandoned. Evolution vs. creationism is a controversy that may never be totally agreed upon universally.

Allegory is a story that works on two levels. Essay -- English Literat

Allegory is a story that works on two levels. "Mature readers appreciate the powerful satire on communism gone wrong, while for younger readers it is a hilarious fable of the farmyard."-Animal Farm As explained in the quote above, Animal Farm is a story that works on two levels. One level is simple, and the other one is the more complex and sophisticated. I would like to explain these levels in this essay. But first, I would like to clearly explain what the word allegory means by giving some examples from well-known fables. One of the best examples is the Little Red Riding Hood. I imagine that most of the people in this world knows about this fable. This story is translated in to many languages, in many different countries in the world. Any ways, the point is that what characteristics of allegory does this story mention? Well, most of the characters in this story represent a particular type of a human personality. For example, the wolf in this story is not just a wolf. As you can see by reading this story, the wolf tries to eat the girl by disguising in to her grandmother. This is clearly explaining what kind of a personality this wolf is representing. He represents a criminal who could trick you and swindle you. The girl represents an innocent person, who can be tricked easily. But at the end it comes out to be that the girl was not just innocent. So, now you can see that the technique of allegory is used in many stories without even knowing. The simpler level of the Animal Farm, is a humorous fable with animals. "For younger readers it is a hilarious fable of the farmyard."-Animal Farm If you do not read this book carefully, this book is just a humorous fable with talking animals in it. When... ...It signifies how a country can easily corrupt under a tyrant leader. Without even the people knowing, a terrible leader can easily control the country. By reading this book, we can see that we should try to save our own country by our own hands. We should not depend on the government, and we should not 100percent believe what the media says. The citizen of the country needs to keep their eyes wide opened. You never know if the truth is being told. Did the Russian people know what was going on? Did they THINK they knew what was going on? We should never forget what happened to Russia by reading this book, Animal Farm. You never know when it will be for YOU to stand up and go against the tyrant leader. So, please do not forget about Animal Farm and the Russian revolution. Even though you think that this will not happen to you, it might happen You never know.

What Is a Hero?

â€Å"How would we tell a hero story today? What would be the setting, what would the enemy be, and what values would the hero embody? † Heroes are a rare, but neccessary type of person. In reality, and our modern society, heroes are not out slaying dragons, or conquering an evil sorcerer. Heroes come in many shapes and forms, and what's capsulated within is the true power of a hero. The mainstream, and fictional heroes are held to a standard of an externally admirable image. Hercules, Zeus, Odysseus, Beowulf, and to a lesser extent, Professional WWE wrestlers along many others are all seen as masculine men who look as if their muscles are unobtainable by their large audience of observers. Take Martin Luther King Jr. for example, a man who inspired an entire race to break the crippling chains of oppresion. This was not a man of tenacious appearance, but when he spoke the world listened, and his words were stained in history. A true display of heroism was shown on September 11th, 2001 in New York City. After two airplanes collided with the Twin Towers, many people were left trapt inside of the buildings with smoke filling their lungs and fire searing their skin. Heroes, such as firefighters and police officiers, quickly reacted and put themselves on the line to save others. Selflessness opitomizes heroism in this instance. These modern day heros, fire fighters, police officiers and even civilians, sacrificed their lives to save another individual which in most cases were complete strangers demonstrated the true beauty of humanity. The enemy, known as Al' Qeada was the group who carried out this attack. Al Qeada is a network of Islamic terrorists operatives who were created to scare society. Most believe that the attacks were brought about because of their hatred for America. The kamikazee suicide bombers perceived themselves as heroes due to their act of selflessness, but a hero does not harm those who are innocent, those who have families, and those who are relied upon by others for love and support. The enemy was not rational about their decision to pestilate fellow human beings who were not involved with the so thought indescretions America had placed on their country. We cannot control the actions of other people, but in times of chaos we can come together and be heroes. Anyone who breathes air on Earth has the potentional to be a hero. It is not an issue of appearance, not an issue of race nor an issue of nationality. Heroism completely depends on bravery, pride, love, and selflessness, which all people are capable of presenting. A channel affect is created when a hero is seen. A hero inspires others to pick up on their traits, and if you have the traits of a hero, you are sure to be idolized.

Hobbes And The Natural State Of Man - 1617 Words

Thomas Hobbes was a divisive figure in his day and remains so up to today. Hobbes’s masterpiece, Leviathan, offended his contemporary thinkers with the implications of his view of human nature and his theology. From this pessimistic view of the natural state of man, Hobbes derives a social contract in order to avoid civil war and violence among men. Hobbes views his work as laying out the moral framework for a stable state. In reality, Hobbes was misconstruing a social contract that greatly benefited the state based on a misunderstanding of civil society and the nature and morality of man. In order to analyze Hobbes’s work of moral and political philosophy, one must first understand his view of human nature. Hobbes’s was greatly influenced by the scientific revolution of the early 17th century, and by the civil unrest and civil war in England while he wrote. Hobbes views the nature of man as being governed by the same laws of nature described by Galileo and refined by Newton .He writes in Leviathan â€Å"And as we see in the water, though the wind cease, the waves give not over rowling (rolling) for a long time after; so also it happeneth in that mation, which is made in the internall parts of a man† . From this, he concludes that man is in a constant state of motion. Being at rest is not the natural state of man, but rather a rarity. From this turbulent view of man, Hobbes goes on to describe the natural state of man. The natural state of man is one of war inShow MoreRelatedTopic sentence. Thomas Hobbes interpretation of natural law is not only radically different, but1300 Words   |  6 Pagessentence. Thomas Hobbes interpretation of natural law is not only radically different, but inconsistent with the traditional view. This can be seen through the similarities and differences found when comparing Thomas Hobbes theory, and Thomas Aquinas’ theory in regards to their view of man’s ultimate goal, their defi nition of natural law in regards to its relationship with human rationality, and lastly how they view the meaning and relationship of divine providence and religion in natural law. The followingRead MoreEssay on The Natural Ways of Locke, Hobbes, and Rousseau1207 Words   |  5 PagesThomas Hobbes, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau introduce their varying opinions surrounding man in nature. The western philosophers mainly concern themselves with the concept of the social contract. Rousseau, Hobbes, and Locke begin with the conception of the individual, because in the natural state, they all believe that man is an independent character. Each of the philosophers used their revolutionary concepts to challenge power, yet their arguments differ dramatically. Through their texts, Hobbes, LockeRead MoreHobbes And Rousseau s Views On The State Of Nature868 Words   |  4 Pagesdifferent views on one central issue. For example Thomas Hobbes, and Jean Jacques Rousseau interpret a Man’s Nature very differently from each other. The discussion over Man’s Nature brings light to Hobbes underlying reason of why people established political societies, and Rousseau’s question of what causes a mans misery? In Hobbes case he believes that Men need to find self-protection in order to shield themselves from men’s natural state of misery and fear. On the other hand, Rousseau didn’t seeRead MoreRousseau s View On State Of Nature1551 Words   |  7 Pagesargument of the state of nature often comes into discussion. However, two mainstream philosophers Thomas Hobbes and Jean- Jacques Rousseau have similarities, but mostly have multiple different ideas on this theory. Although Hobbes makes valid points Rousseau s view on s tate of nature is more realistic then Hobbes. Rousseau’s view on the state of nature is interpreted as a forest, and refers to the â€Å"savage man†. He begins by explaining how he relates man to an animal he states â€Å"when I strip thatRead MoreHuman Nature Is Good, And Being A Beast1165 Words   |  5 Pages Thomas Hobbes was an English philosopher, and the author of Leviathan. Hobbes declared that human life was â€Å"solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short†(Hobbes, 107). Hobbes felt that the natural state of man was beast-like, and savage. Thus, he felt that it is civilization that influences and challenges humanity from our fundamental wickedness. Within his view, human nature is dangerous; which can only be rescued through culture and community. According to Hobbes, being â€Å"civilized† is good, and beingRead MoreComparison of Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau Essay1092 Words   |  5 Pageswritings of Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Through Thomas Hobbes world-renowned publication Leviathan and Rousseau’s discourses on basic political principals and concepts, each man validated their thoughts on human nature and what is required for a successful society within their respective government confines. The distinct differences between Hobbes and Rousseau’s opinions on the natural state of man frame the argument of the different parenting styles the each man would inevitably applyRead MoreCompare and Contrast John Locke and Thomas Hobbes1028 Words   |  5 PagesMan: The Social Animal Brian Greaney Political Science 230 Prof. T. Mullins April 18, 2011 John Locke and Thomas Hobbes were two main political philosophers during the seventeenth century. Hobbes is largely known for his writing of the â€Å"Leviathan†, and Locke for authoring An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Included in their essays, both men discuss the purpose and structure of government, natural law, and the characteristics of man in and out of the state of nature. The two mensRead MoreCompare And Contrast Hobbes And Locke1391 Words   |  6 Pages Hobbes and Locke in State of Nature and War. Introduction Without a doubt, Hobbes with his work Leviathan and Locke with his treatises on The Civil Government illustrated a before and after regarding Philosophy and politics of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The historical events in England such as the English civil war (Hobbes) and the war against France (Locke) marked both scholars and influenced their thoughts to match and oppose naturally. However, both made a significant contributionRead MoreEssay about Comparing Hobbes and Lockes Versions of the Social Contract1349 Words   |  6 PagesComparing Hobbes and Lockes Versions of the Social Contract Thomas Hobbes, author of Leviathan, claims that peace and unity can best be achieved by setting up a society by having humans agree to a covenant (Hobbes: Ch.18 pg.548). A sovereign who is in charge of protecting the society or state rules Hobbes’s society. In his introduction, Hobbes describes this commonwealth as an artificial person and as a body politic that mimics the human body. Hobbes portrays the state as a gigantic humanRead MoreThe Theory Of Property And Property Rights900 Words   |  4 Pagesphilosophers have struggled to describe. The renowned political theorists Thomas Hobbes and John Locke hold vastly different opinions in regard to the concept of property. In 1651, Hobbes outlined his views in his book, Leviathan, where he discusses societal structure and his social contract theory. Almost forty years later, Locke published his Second Treatise of Government, in which he described mankind’s state of nature, and natural rights. These two works expressed n ear complete opposite viewpoints in regards