K. C. Cole Seeing Things Summary

Creating an Evolutionary Way of Seeing Things
K.C. Cole discusses in her article, “Seeing Things,” that there is never just one way to look at something. There are numerous views one can take on when observing possible scientific theories. Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution is criticized and compared to the theory of creationism. Both theories are prime examples of seeing things from a different perspective influenced by either science or religion. The ability to see things clearly resonates in both arguments and each side presents a different way on how to perceive their own theory. To have clear vision you must be able to make decisions based on the information given to you as well as provide intelligent answers about how you see things.
He made his discoveries through detailed studies of his subjects, reptiles and birds, and by testing his findings until he was satisfied they were accurate. This way of seeing is one that directly relates to K.C. Cole’s article, “Seeing Things.” “Scientific perception has a different authority from personal perception, because it can more easily be shared. It’s a way of seeing that many people can agree on- or at least agree on a way of thinking about it” (82). Darwin used his scientific findings to back up his theory, which was easily understood and accepted by his fellow colleagues. When people have hard evidence in front of them, they have no reason not to believe it. Darwin’s theory of natural selection is explained better using examples rather than a raw definition. Darwin explains natural selection in terms of wolves hunting their prey. Wolves prey on deer, and if by some chance the deer decrease in numbers during the winter season, one can safely assume the strongest of the pack would survive. The strongest wolves would be preserved or selected provided that they retained their strength during the following seasons and be able to continue to adapt to the environment they reside in (Darwin 7). The explanation of evolution by natural selection is a brilliant answer to this complex matter because it is not a theory of chance. The evolution of species represents a gradual buildup over millions of years, which begins with something very simple but
Intelligent design advocates that there is one greater being that is responsible for all of the changes that have occurred over millions of years. Not to say that this being is a religious figure, but in most cultures, the belief of some type of god being responsible is common. As our generation approaches a new age of thinking, “the Creationists desire a larger following and therefore realize they must take religion out of the evolutionary equation” (Nelkin). Though they were motivated by their religious beliefs, Creationists avoided the mention of religious concepts as they sought to get around the 1st Amendment, which states the right of separation of church and state. Unlike twenty years ago, the new era of Creationists try to invoke skepticism rather than refer to biblical passages. “Intelligent design properly formulated is a theory of information… [it] becomes a theory for detecting and measuring information, explaining its origin and tracing its flow…[it] is therefore not a study of intelligent causes per se but of informational pathways induced by intelligent causes. As a result intelligent design presupposes neither a creator nor miracles” (Hasker). To have a religious figure be the explanation of the evolution of species may not appeal to everyone’s approach of seeing