Creation "vs" Evolution(+Big Bang Theory) - Why do we Argue?

Question

Why is it that mankind seeks an answer to this debate? What is the point of this arguement?

Answer 1

We want to know our origins. In this massive universe, we want to know how we came to be. While I don't believe the universe is infinite, it is finite beyond our ability to comprehend.  

Answer 2

The belief of 'intelligent creation' is one that is wholly created by mankind in order to give us a more pleasing and optimistic view of where we came from.

Just like man created the notion of 'heaven' to make death look more pleasing, so did we create the notion of some intelligent, all-knowing God who created us with some purpose.  A big bang of random particles is too depressing for people to accept, so we need something more pleasant to believe in since people can't handle the dull reality of what science shows us to have likely happened.

Answer 3

Humankind is sentient and curious. We each have, to a varying degree, an internal drive to answer the "Why" and "How" questions. This debate pits two belief systems into a head-on confrontation.

Both sides have their own defenses, data and philosophy. (If they are truly honest with themselves they will accept that each has a belief system in place) On one side, generally, there is a naturalistic explanation on the other, there is a super-natural explanation.

Answer 4

well: it is because of "Philosophy  " was a Theory where they talked

about Answers Arts & Humanities an history study with

Anstonomy & Space  very important Science & Mathematics knowlages

Answer 5

I think people who believe in religion are afraid to be open to other theories. I think the reason for that is that religions like Christianity threaten it's believers with eternal damnation in the fires of h**l if they don't stay faithful, it's either a big misinterpretation or an outright lie coming from clergy, like the pope, who have devoted their lives to it and need money to survive and/or live comfortably.

Answer 6

FEAR and PRIDE.....Philosophies all you want, you look deep enough and it all comes down to that.  

Answer 7

We argue because we don't understand. We debate to understand that which escapes our comprehension. No one can really answer, so man compensates by trying to prove what they think is the correct view of an unanswerable question. It is ultimately futile.

Answer 8

People want to know where we came from; it's similar to someone who was adopted wanting to seek out his/her biological parents.  

Answer 9

There is no point. It is all done because one side wants to "prove" that they are right and the other isn't when in reality science cannot verify or deny the validity of either theory.

It really is a pointless endeavor both to argue or research either.

EDIT @ Captain:

You cite the "Young Earth" Creationists... most people who have read the Bible notice that it does not start on the first "day" and therefore the entire "Young Earth" concept is ill-conceived at best. A more legitimate position would be that the Earth was created along with the rest of the universe many billions of years ago and was then used around 10,000 years ago for the current human population.

Answer 10

Most of mankind that I'm familiar with that avidly argues this topic doesn't seek truth or an answer to the debate. They seek money, popularity, or to be accepted by their peers.

Answer 11

we argue becaseu 'MU' is not a possible answer to a closed western 'either / or' question actually mu is not even a western concept at all yet - and 'mu' is the answer to this one.

Mu - unask the question.  the question is wrong.  

Answer 12

Some people, religious, fear an afterlife, and the other people, evolution,  enjoy pissing the religious off, and giving them more to think about.

Answer 13

Because the creationists call the evolutionists "godless heathens who ignore the word of God", and the evolutionists call the creationists "religious nutjobs who ignore scientific fact"

The scientists are interested in emperical truth, and the creationists are interested in religious truth. Religious trugh says [according to some, well the most vocal creationists] that the world was literally created in 6 days, and that the wrold is less than 10,000 years old and that all scientific testing that shows it is longer is a) flawed, b) contaminated, c) both

The scientists claim that the creationists are ignoring the obvious in the face of overwhelming scientific evidence on the notion that their holy book is correct, and that because it says something different than what science says, the book is right, and the science is wrong.

Such viewpoints cannot really co-exist peacefully, because they are opposite of each other, with each side claiming that the other is wrong. They can ignore each other, and engage in peaceful debate, but with such passion behind each arguments, it is hard for them to be civil all the time. Especially on the internet.

Answer 14

I see your point.  There is no proof either way, so why argue?  Its like arguing if pizza or cheese steaks taste better... it is completely subjective.