Help For The Layman

[mik3cap]

Do you think people would have a better understanding of the situation if evolution is referred to as a "scientific model" rather than a "scientific theory"? "Theory" apparently has too many connotations for the average uninformed person to grasp. Is it not accurate to refer to evolution as a model, the same way that there's a "standard model" of particles and their interactions in physics?

I know it's not possible to convince average uninformed persons of religious conviction of anything. But I'm hoping that maybe we can get the fence-sitting folks less convinced of absolute rightness a bit more over to the side of overwhelming evidence if we change the language slightly. Of course, I suppose it's possible for anti-science folks to just come up with a dismissive "Well, it's just a MODEL, that means it's like a TOY, it's not reeeeal..."

Comments

[mikecap.livejournal.com]

As an anti-religious person, I'm somewhat okay with alienating people who have any kind of religious beliefs. I think the harm that comes from any tolerance of religion is incalculable, and that society and humanity need to cast aside superstition in order to further the species. If children can grow up and give up Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny, people can also learn to give up gods and ghosts. I think the hypocrisy of calling people who believe in the Tooth Fairy crazy and calling people who believe in Jehovah saintly is the most ridiculous thing ever.

If society decides to make me an outcast because I don't want to tolerate doctors who believe prayer will heal me, or pharmacists who won't prescribe birth control, or presidents who invade countries because god said so (and yes, even scientists who think a magic man lives behind the curtain of the natural order, an idea that goes completely against scientific reasoning)... well, fine by me! I reject that society, and will watch with sadness as it sinks yet again into another dark age brought on by religious nutjobs who believe in magic.