Talk:Social effect of evolutionary theory

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject on Sociology This article is supported by the Sociology WikiProject, which gives a central approach to sociology and related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article Social effect of evolutionary theory, or visit the project page for more details on the projects.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
High This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Merge

As it stands this article is more about various reactions to the theory of evolution than its history, and it should be merged with History of evolutionary thought to avoid confusion as to what each each article is for.-dave souza 18:57, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

It was originally titled Social effect of evolutionary theory but somebody moved it. It, however, should remain separate from the scientific history of the theory, although that article should have a summary and a Main article: link. Lexor|Talk

[edit] This page needs work

The intro is terrible. Most of the religious objections to the theory of evolution don't have anything to do with humans being classified as animals but rather how evolution contradicts their creation myths. The article's intro seems to be exclusively focusing on how "evolution says humans are animals". That's not really something on a he said/she said basis ... it's the phylogenetic truth. And humans aren't "just" animals - more specifically, we're vertebrates, and more specifically than that, we're placental mammals. Nobody denies this. The religious objection is that in addition to being placental mammals we have some sort of soul, which the theory of evolution actually doesn't say anything about. So I would contend that there should be no religious objections to biology for classifying humans as placental mammals (and hence animals) because that's the truth. All of the religious objections are for other reasons. The article needs to be changed to reflect this. --Cyde Weys [u] [t] [c] 21:31, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

I have made a small edit to the intro to include objections on creationism grounds but I have left in that others object to it because it says humans are animals that share a common ancestor with monkeys rather than being something special, as there are many who do. Most of those who object do so on both reasons although even then usually more strongly on the creation side of things.--62.25.106.209 11:34, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Territory and Dominance It is surprising that these well studied aspects of social behavior in animals have not been extended to human behavior. Perhaps it is the difficulty of doing laboratory research on the human subjects, but I don't think so. Perhaps the " dominance " of behavioristic and operational research in academic research has ruled out the softer evidence in humans. Perhaps the dominance of psychoanalytic theory in psychiatry has edged out non-Freudian ideas. Perhaps the weight of religious opposition to futher intrusion of evolution into the "purely human " behaviors have mititated against such discussion. I would be interested in developing a section for this article or perhaps a separate article on territoriality and dominance in human social behavior if it would be acceptible to the ruling editors. May I have some discussion on this. Without discussion I probably will proceed. 208.63.238.68 22:17, 20 December 2005 (UTC)


Have indulged in a major bout of Huxley-love. Adam Cuerden talk 16:40, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, that might have to go somewhere else. It's own page perhaps? It's larger than the rest of this article put together, and not nearly as informative. Endomorphic 02:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Should information on social debates over evolution (ie: Scopes Monkey Trial) go in this article, or in the evolution main? Tyrant Rex 03:46, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Anon plea

please can someone try to narrow this down and make it simple for us students who simply have to find out the differences between darwins theory and conflicting theories, and sugesst reasons for the different theories—Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.120.255.200 (talkcontribs) 13:11, 28 May 2007

Wikipedia isn't tailored for homework. You might have to do some work :) Richard001 07:50, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Subject?

The heading for this article seems to have got lost below a section on transmutation, so I'll hide that until this gets sorted out. . dave souza, talk 14:01, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lead

Shouldn't the lead section that is in bold exactly mimic the article name? The social effect of evolutionary thought doesn't quite convey the same thing. WLU 14:24, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reference

Reference 5 was removed from YouTube for breaking copyright terms.88.111.80.112 (talk) 02:06, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] social effect of other religions

This article focuses a lot on Christianity. What about how evolution affected other religions? Should a link to the article on Jewish views on evolution be added to provide more viewpoints? Of course I can't think of any examples where other religions were impacted as much as some sects of Christianity have been (at least not as publicly), but then again I could be wrong. --Deepraine (talk) 15:17, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

You could do a {{main}}, or a merge, depending on how long the pages are. I'd duplicate what happened with the RC church - main link and short article. WLU (talk) 15:25, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
I added the link like for the Roman Catholic church, but I didn't summarize anything. I think someone a little more knowledgeable should write a short paragraph there, I gave it a try but ended up with a mess...
As for adding other religions, there is already a page for Islamic creationism and Hinduism and creationism that mention evolution, but it seems a bit unorganized to me. Either way more information seems to be needed. Unfortunately, I tried doing a google search to see if I could find anything, but the only thing that came up were sites about evolution and Christianity. --Deepraine (talk) 22:06, 12 December 2007 (UTC)