# Why do most Americans deny evolution? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 31, 2005, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-most-americans-deny-evolution/337801 "2005-12-31T00:16:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![Tevildo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9bd4f/32.png) [@Tevildo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tevildo)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2006, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-most-americans-deny-evolution/337801/221 "2006-01-05T21:59:09Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > Well, here we are again. Knowledge, like existence, has many definitions and has been controversial since Aristotle. This is all just twaddlywot. My apologies. 🙂 However, I would still argue that, when it comes to the real world, we can never have knowledge (in a practical, rather than a theoretical, sense) without some degree of perception. We can know that 2 + 2 = 4 without accessing the real world in any way. But, if we want to _know_ that a train which leaves Pittsburgh (etc etc) reaches a certain point at a certain time, we have to actually look at it. Our knowledge of arithmetic can lead us to say “It _ought_ to be there at that time, and, if it isn’t, something has gone wrong”, but, until our hypothesis is tested empirically, we can’t (IMO) claim any _knowledge_ of the situation. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2006, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-most-americans-deny-evolution/337801/222 "2006-01-05T22:19:06Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > But that block was never in your head. You know now what time the train will arrive. You did not know that before. Thus, you have acquired knowledge. Contrary to popular opinion among physicalists, CTM is [not the only game in town](http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/computational-mind/#onlygame). I disagree that the time is a new block. It’s just different way of looking at the same block. > [@](#): > > Incidentally, this from you to Bobthebuilder was quite astonishing… > > …given that I’ve been trying to pin you down over what we both mean by existence and knowledge. Shouldn’t you, for the sake of honesty, afford me the same courtesy you demand? I don’t understand your objection. I don’t think I’ve ever been coy about the fact that I define existence and knowledge in purely empirical terms. ---
**Author:** ![other-wise](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/4bbf92/32.png) [@other-wise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/other-wise)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2006, 10:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-most-americans-deny-evolution/337801/223 "2006-01-05T22:28:10Z")
**Diogenes** , **Tevildo** , as I’ve mentioned on these boards before, I have a long history of sleep disorders including hypnogogic and hypnopomic episodes and quite a bit of lucid dreaming (lucid dreaming is when you’re dreaming and at some point in the dream you suddenly _know_ you are dreaming. You can then consciously affect the dream: fly, climb walls like Spider-man, etc. Some lucid dreamers can even signal to outsiders via eye movement while they’re fast asleep). I don’t see how my acquisition of the knowledge that I’m dreaming is empirical or perceptual. There certainly is no sensory input involved. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2006, 10:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-most-americans-deny-evolution/337801/224 "2006-01-05T22:44:52Z")
You do not acquire new information in dreams. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2006, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-most-americans-deny-evolution/337801/225 "2006-01-05T22:52:01Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > I disagree that the time is a new block. It’s just different way of looking at the same block. What block? Your knowledge of when the train would arrive was the empty set. Empty sets don’t contain blocks. > [@](#): > > I don’t understand your objection. I don’t think I’ve ever been coy about the fact that I define existence and knowledge in purely empirical terms. That’s fine, but that does not mean that people who define it differently are equivocating. It is not the case that you are the central orb around which the rest of us revolve. 🙂 My objection is that you do not acknowledge that existence and knowledge are controversial, and that theories other than your own are valid. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2006, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-most-americans-deny-evolution/337801/226 "2006-01-05T22:53:25Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > You do not acquire new information in dreams. Do you, in your opinion, acquire new information from reading? ---
**Author:** ![other-wise](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/4bbf92/32.png) [@other-wise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/other-wise)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2006, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-most-americans-deny-evolution/337801/227 "2006-01-05T22:56:26Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > You do not acquire new information in dreams. In the pre-lucid portion of the dream, I did not know I was dreaming, and could not manipulate the dream (nor would it occur to me to try). Since I was not aware that I was dreaming, how is subsequently becoming lucid _not_ the aquisition of new information? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2006, 10:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-most-americans-deny-evolution/337801/228 "2006-01-05T22:57:04Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > Do you, in your opinion, acquire new information from reading? Yes. Reading is a sensory exercise. I guess you could compare the train thing to reading. It’s translating sensory input into meaningful information. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2006, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-most-americans-deny-evolution/337801/229 "2006-01-05T23:01:28Z")
> [@other-wise](#): > > In the pre-lucid portion of the dream, I did not know I was dreaming, and could not manipulate the dream (nor would it occur to me to try). Since I was not aware that I was dreaming, how is subsequently becoming lucid _not_ the aquisition of new information? It’s not really new information, it’s just a new way of processing it. On some level, all dreaming is “lucid.” Your brain knows the difference even if you don’t. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2006, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-most-americans-deny-evolution/337801/230 "2006-01-05T23:13:08Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > What block? Your knowledge of when the train would arrive was the empty set. Empty sets don’t contain blocks. I’ll go back to the “reading” analogy. Your translating raw sensory input into “information” which is meaningful to you. > [@](#): > > That’s fine, but that does not mean that people who define it differently are equivocating. It is not the case that you are the central orb around which the rest of us revolve. 🙂 My objection is that you do not acknowledge that existence and knowledge are controversial, and that theories other than your own are valid. Empirical definitions of knowledge and existence are the only ones which can be rationally discussed. Bringing Cartesian doubt into a rational debate just crashes the debate and makes further discussion impossible. I see it as equivocating, evasive and cheating. It’s taking the ball and going home. It’s useless. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2006, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-most-americans-deny-evolution/337801/231 "2006-01-05T23:13:23Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > Yes. Reading is a sensory exercise. > > I guess you could compare the train thing to reading. It’s translating sensory input into meaningful information. Okay. Thank you! We’re in a position where I may address our difference directly. The sensory exercise from reading is the collision of photons with your retina, just as it is with witnessing an event. But what you are observing as you read is not an event; you are observing abstractions — symbols that represent ideas, many of which are not physical at all. That is a very different sort of observation from the one used to conduct a scientific experiment. My point is that you may acquire the exact same knowledge about gravity two different ways: (1) by analytics, i.e., reading the General Theory of Relativity; or (2) by empiricals, i.e., watching a star during an eclipse. The mathematical determination of the train’s arrival time is an example of an analytical epistemology. You may also wait until you see the train come 'round the bend. That would be an empirical epistemology. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2006, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-most-americans-deny-evolution/337801/232 "2006-01-05T23:18:56Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > I’ll go back to the “reading” analogy. Your translating raw sensory input into “information” which is meaningful to you. But that input is completely abstract. The words are doing nothing. > [@](#): > > Empirical definitions of knowledge and existence are the only ones which can be rationally discussed. Bringing Cartesian doubt into a rational debate just crashes the debate and makes further discussion impossible. I see it as equivocating, evasive and cheating. It’s taking the ball and going home. It’s useless. I never said anything about Cartesian doubt. I gave you a link to an excellent summary of theories of existence spanning two thousand years. To lay claim to one of them as superior to all others by nothing more than declaratory fiat is patently absurd. Perhaps it is the case that _you_ cannot discuss alternate theories rationally, but projecting that limitation onto others is arbitrary to the extreme. These theories have been rationally discussed for hundreds of generations, and the discussions are even now ongoing. ---
**Author:** ![other-wise](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/4bbf92/32.png) [@other-wise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/other-wise)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2006, 11:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-most-americans-deny-evolution/337801/233 "2006-01-05T23:20:32Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > It’s not really new information, it’s just a new way of processing it. I’m still not understanding how you’re differentiating the two. Unprocessed information is no information at all. > [@](#): > > On some level, all dreaming is “lucid.” Your brain knows the difference even if you don’t. I’m going to need an explanation or a cite for _that_ statement. ---
**Author:** ![bonitahi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7993a0/32.png) [@bonitahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bonitahi)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2006, 3:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-most-americans-deny-evolution/337801/234 "2006-01-07T03:13:39Z")
So, are politicians, percentage wise, “believers” in greater numbers than the general public because they are placating for the creationist’s vote? ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2006, 3:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-most-americans-deny-evolution/337801/235 "2006-01-07T03:18:39Z")
> [@bonitahi](#): > > So, are politicians, percentage wise, “believers” in greater numbers than the general public because they are placating for the creationist’s vote? It’s difficult to tell, since they are also a bunch of liars. ---
**Author:** ![bonitahi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7993a0/32.png) [@bonitahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bonitahi)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2006, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-most-americans-deny-evolution/337801/236 "2006-01-07T21:10:13Z")
In the _St Pete Times_, 1/7 page B1, it says the Pinellas County high school’s new science biology textbooks will have four sentences explaining the earth’s creation based on intelligent design. How can they do that in sight of the Dover, PA vs U.S.Supreme Court decision? Please? ---
**Author:** ![bonitahi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7993a0/32.png) [@bonitahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bonitahi)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2006, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-most-americans-deny-evolution/337801/237 "2006-01-07T21:13:35Z")
I want to add that also in the paper it says that the majority (here we go again) of the parents in Pinellas County are in favor of intelligent design being taught in their schools. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2006, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-most-americans-deny-evolution/337801/238 "2006-01-07T21:25:17Z")
> [@](#): > > How can they do that in sight of the Dover, PA vs U.S.Supreme Court decision? Please? The Dover decision affects only the jurisdiction of that court. It can provide discussion points and exemplars for other suits in other jurisdictions, but it does not have the effect of setting the rules for the nation. If a school district in that part of Pennsylvania tried to repeat the Dover experience, then the judge at that trial would have to follow the Dover decision, but if Pinellas was sued, the judge would only have to acknowledge the existence of the Dover decision and might find (based on a different presentation of the suit) in favor of the Pinellas District. If several such cases are tried with differing outcomes, the losing party will tend to appeal, based on the precedent of the decision they preferred. Eventually, such cases would wander up to the Appellate Courts of the U.S., and, if pursued, to the Supreme Court of the U.S. Once the SCOTUS makes a ruling, _that_ decision is binding on the whole country (until someone decides to argue to for the opposite outcome using a different logic, pursuing _that_ as far as the SCOTUS). ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2006, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-most-americans-deny-evolution/337801/239 "2006-01-07T21:27:29Z")
> [@bonitahi](#): > > In the _St Pete Times_, 1/7 page B1, it says the Pinellas County high school’s new science biology textbooks will have four sentences explaining the earth’s creation based on intelligent design. How can they do that in sight of the Dover, PA vs U.S.Supreme Court decision? Please? The Dover decision was not by the Supreme Court. It was a lower court ruling that is only binding within that court’s jurisdiction. ---
**Author:** ![sleeepy2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@sleeepy2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sleeepy2)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2006, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-most-americans-deny-evolution/337801/240 "2006-01-07T21:53:05Z")
I know a few non-religious, poorly educated people who reject evolution because they’re offended at the idea that we evolved from monkeys. The fact that the theory of evolution doesn’t say we evolved from monkeys doesn’t really dissuade them. Even if that’s what the theory did say, what’s wrong with monkeys? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-most-americans-deny-evolution/337801.md?page=11) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-most-americans-deny-evolution/337801.md?page=13)