Do atheists study any biology other than evolution?

Do you read on biology topics other than evolution?`

  • Yes, and I am an atheist

    Votes: 17 77.3%

  • Yes, and I am not an atheist

    Votes: 1 4.5%

  • No, and I am an athiest

    Votes: 1 4.5%

  • No, and I am not an atheist

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Some other opinion

    Votes: 3 13.6%
  • Total voters
    22
S.A.M.

S.A.M.

uniquely dreadful
Valued Senior Member
The whole ballyhoo over evolution and its acceptance or denial by theists/atheists seems to me like a hijacking of science to support/oppose an ideology

So to atheists here who are NOT biologists. Do you study anything else other than evolution in biology?

If yes, why?
If not, why?

Please vote in the anonymous poll
 
You'll find, if you ask around, that the generally high proportion of atheists found in the professional ranks of the sciences is also found in biology.

As far as evolution being the field of dispute, that's the theists' choice. We don't see church-organized mass political campaigns to get thermodynamic theory modified to allow Biblical or Quranic events, or school boards voting to put stickers in all the physics texts warning students that conservation of angular momentum is only a theory, and Joshua's sun could have stood still. When we do, you'll see the dispute spread into physics.
 
As somebody with a keen interest in science but one who is trained in the physical sciences rather than the biological sciences, I take an interest in developments in biology as described in pop science magazines like New Scientists and Scientific American. I don't read biology journals.

I'm not sure what you expect non-biologists to "study". Can you explain, please?
 
I'm wondering how much of their interest in evolution is due to an interest in biology or science rather than as a result of some theists rejecting it.
 
I think many scientists are interested in the evolution/creationism issue because creationism is such a clear example of an inability and/or unwillingness to think critically, to do science properly (or indeed at all), and to attempt to obscure the truth for reasons of religious expediency. Most scientists have a commitment to the scientific method and they tend to get a little annoyed when pseudoscientists make a mockery of that method by pretending that their ideas are scientific.

If Creationists were to admit that their creation stories are not scientific, rather than denying the science of evolution and trying to inject religious education into science classes, then scientists would most likely take less of an interest in the matter.
 
Thats fine, but the poll is not addressed to scientists. And if scientists have just discovered that most people do not think critically, well what can I say to that? Maybe they should step outside once in a while?
 
SAM said:
I'm wondering how much of their interest in evolution is due to an interest in biology or science rather than as a result of some theists rejecting it.
Click to expand...
It's the other way around, for me. My attention was drawn to theism and its philosophical influences from the apparent effects of the worldview on people's handling of matters closer to my heart.

"Us nature mystics have to stick together" (Edward Abbey)
 
I'm reading a book on primates. But it's hard to study biology without thinking about evolution.
 
Even if someone (AI) tampered with life here on Earth, or life appeared here by sheer happenstance (comet collision) it still doesn't answer the question of how life began. Evolution is secondary to life's beginnings in my mind at least. I'd be more inclined to read something on origin of life than evolution. Although Spider is right, hard to discount evolution when you pick up a book on biology.

As far as being interested because theists reject evolution....No way. I just read "The Ancestor's Tale' and if it wasn't for Dawkins firing off the odd barb against creationists I never would have thought of them. My interest in theists is much more complex than that.
 
S.A.M. said:
So you read books on other biology topics besides evolution?
Click to expand...

I have. I'm not addicted to them if that's what you mean.

Creationist life literature: If it isn't biology or mythology then what is it?
 
Last edited:
I wonder if there are any atheists who haven't read books on evolution?

Maybe I should have added that option as well.
 
S.A.M. said:
The whole ballyhoo over evolution and its acceptance or denial by theists/atheists seems to me like a hijacking of science to support/oppose an ideology

So to atheists here who are NOT biologists. Do you study anything else other than evolution in biology?

If yes, why?
If not, why?

Please vote in the anonymous poll
Click to expand...

Yes, because I'm interested.
Also, I did study Biology but I'm not a biologist.

Edit: Study or read ?
 
quadraphonics said:
I wonder the same thing about you.
Click to expand...

I think my own interest in evolution is not much because I am a more biochemistry type of person, I love to play with stuff and see what results. I also love to apply my knowledge to people. Philosophy is more interesting to me than metascience because how we think is more interesting to me than which monkey we are related to. I also find physics extremely boring. :p
 
physiology, neuroscience, not to much evolution but I did read the blind watchmaker a while back...
 
S.A.M. said:
I think my own interest in evolution
Click to expand...

You expressed a marked disinterest in the actual science of evolution recently. To paraphrase, you told us you received an elementary overview back in high school, and then "ran as fast as you could" away from the subject.

What you do seem interested in is atheists.

S.A.M. said:
Philosophy is more interesting to me than metascience
Click to expand...

Metascience is a branch of philosophy.

You have a real problem phrasing coherent sentences, and keeping track of the meanings of words and concepts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top