Some Observations on How Creationism is Perceived

Look at these poly-syllogisms:

1) Evolution is Science and Creationism is Religion.
2) Therefore it is a fraud to speak of Creation Science,
3) since this makes Creationism usurp the honour of being Science, which rightly belongs to Evolution;
4) and if homeschooling parents are Creationist, they will teach homeschooling as science;
5) therefore homeschooling is dangerous.

That's the first and here's the second:

1) Evolution is Science and already proven.
2) But what's already proven doesn't need proof,
3) therefore the expert or believer in experts who believes evolution has no burden of proof
4) whereas the Creationist has the burden of proof along each step,
5) because he's the one making an extraordinary claim.

Some things are clear about people who reason like this (yes, I've come across them on the internet, I am just adding logical structure in my analysis of their process of thought):

• "Science" is their "Bible"
• not believing "Science" is their "heresy"
• the actual Bible is their "false prophet" since so often it involves people in "not believing Science"
• and this makes "Science" the positive religion of Atheists, notably this type.
• Meanwhile, logic and pertinent facts about what science and religion actually mean are thrown out of the window.

I'll give you one more. But unfortunately, it was not by an Atheist.

1) All nations have Founding Myths;
2) all Founding Myths are Myths;
3) all Myths are Made-Up Stories (because a dictionary says that is what the word means)
4) but the Torah is the Founding Myth of the Hebrew nation;
5) therefore the Torah (and on into books of Samuel at least) are made up stories.

But hey, they are still the word of God!

And the majority of Christian theologians support "some texts should be read literally and some metaphorically" ...

As the person in question was replying under the video of a Dominican and had a French name, I'll suppose he thinks of himself as a Catholic. I did that when informing him that St. Thomas Aquinas and most Catholic theologians historically would have disagreed with him. They would have said ALL texts need to be taken literally and ALL texts figuratively. Of the minorities who don't hold that, it seems the Literal Only with St. John Chrysostom is larger than the Figurative Only (if it ever existed) of Origen.

There is one more observation on all three syllogisms. The ones holding this kind of reasoning are in fact betting on things always being what they are labelled as, on there being no conflicts about labels and on there being no multiple meanings of words, like George Washington certainly being a "Founding Myth" and as certainly NOT a "made up story" for the US, and that the correct labels are those that are circulating most widely in formal and informal communictions right now.

As a linguist, I can say that Adam's language could not have developed from animal communications. But as a philologist, one concerned with old texts, I can also say that this is not how reality works. Several of these labels have shifted meaning over the centuries and all have been applied in ways that not just some lonely nut case, but large portions of the world would consider as mislabelling.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
Présentation de la Sainte Vierge
dans le Temple
21.XI.2022

Hierosolymis Praesentatio beatae Dei Genitricis Virginis Mariae in Templo.

PS - the thread under the Dominican's (?) video is mirrored here, for readers of French:
Répliques Assorties : Quand un Dominicain fait du Stephen J. Gould
https://repliquesassorties.blogspot.com/2021/07/quand-un-dominicain-fait-du-stephen-j.html

The post was posted in its original shape on Friday, 9 July 2021, has since been seen 1790 times and the updates with Roger Girard start last week./HGL

PPS, yes, I am tired. I think I am fulfilling the brag of Kent Hovind of beating them in a discussion, "even with half my brain tied to the back" - over tired counts as that, and I'm still beating his prestanda./HGL

PPPS, to illustrate my fatigue, I forgot first that the Feast was supposed to be given in English, then to point this oblivion out when writing previous PS./HGL