The evolution of programmes and goals in a more general sense is not a confusing, misleading or ideological use of the term. You’ve heard of grammar Nazis? Guess why that came to mind. 
Ooh, the condescension of the maybe erudite!
Programs change and develop, sure. No argument there from anyone. Yet notice what BioLogos has trouble admitting?
There is an ideological desire to call “ANY kind of change” as “evolution”. Emergence? No, that’s called evolution. Development? No, that’s just “evolution” too. So, where does it all end, this exaggeration of “evolution” into a Monopoly over change?
Why else would a person even feel a need to do so, when the term “development” is obviously better, more specific, more accurate, and more meaningful to more people?
Please, Dale, put “grammar Nazi” against “grammar fascist”. ERS is grammar fascism, front and centre. ALL Christians, Muslims, Jews & Baha’is should stay away from “evolution of religion” grammar, for GOOD reasons. If you haven’t yet recognised those reasons, I hope you eventually do.
I have been put in my place, and I bow.
1 Like
When this is thrown at me: “You need to get out from your own field more often. It’s a big world out there”?
Mere self defence.
Forgive me the added barb, as it came after your “bow”. Respectfully. Thanks.
I agree. But the English word ‘evolution’ has a semantic range and can be used appropriately to talk about both.
3 Likes
Yes, but…
Ok, now’s your perfect opportunity, linguist Christy. An opportunity to clarify yourself, as you’ve never done it before, since you’re obviously marginal in thinking that “religion evolves naturally from conception”.
What is the “semantic range” (as you call it) of “evolution” in your “applied linguist’s” view?
Tell us please, what “evolves” and what “doesn’t evolve” - what’s this “range” you speak of? Or, more closely, which fields properly study “evolution” and which don’t? And please, NAME those fields that don’t, so we know that you know that they don’t use evolutionary language. That would be helpful to hear from an evangelcal missionary linguist.
Don’t skimp on specificity please, as this is a golden opportunity for you to finally become a “theorist.” Thanks.
Forgive me, but I am concerned that BioLogos moderator Christy will display wrath, anger & disbelief, rather than grace, patience, love, and listening in a way that comes across as “trying to understand” something that is clearly very new to her.
At BioLogos, I fear “theistic evolutionism” will be used to trump rational reasonable balance contra scientism, and intentionally exclude generous, kind, gentle “anti-evolutionism”. Hoping that will not play out here.
Gregory, it is often frustrating to talk to you because you consistently misrepresent my ideas and then ask me to defend them. Where did I say anything close to this?
(There is no such thing as applied linguists, only applied linguistics.)
From Cambridge Dictionary.
Primary sense: a gradual process of change and development
Secondary sense: In biology, the process by which the physical characteristics of types of creatures change over time, new types of creatures develop, and others disappear.
Sounds about right. Notice the PRIMARY sense is a word applicable to many, many, things.
Any field that studies gradual processes of change or development can talk about evolution. So, that’s pretty much all of them.
You made up “evolutionary language.” I don’t believe it is a thing. Using the word “evolution” is simply using English, not using “evolutionary language.”
My big theory is that anyone communicating in English has the English lexicon at their disposal. Included in the English lexicon are lots of good words like evolution, mutation, adaptation, variant, ancestor, extinct, etc. that can be used to talk productively about many things other than the biological process of evolution. I don’t understand why you find this so difficult to grasp or how anything I am saying is not completely obvious and fairly banal.
2 Likes
You are afraid of many things you don’t really need to be afraid of.
2 Likes
This topic was automatically closed 6 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.