Chapter 7
SUBSTITUTING
MORE ACCURATE WORDS OR PHRASES FOR
“EVOLUTION”
At
least 94 more specific terms and phrases can be substituted for the “e-word”.
If,
in a biology textbook, words or phrases from the
following list were substituted for “evolution”, “evolutionary”, and “evolve”,
then the meaning of any sentence using them would become more precise:
EVOLUTION
(as a noun):
1.
change
2.
change of living forms
3.
change over time
4.
changes
5.
changes over time
6.
gene pool change
7.
change in the gene pool of a
species
8.
species change
9.
species change mechanism
10.
change over time
11.
species change over time
12.
change in inherited traits
13.
change in degree of adaptation
14.
change in organism diversity
15.
change in allele frequency
16.
change in form, from less complex
to more complex
17.
change by mutation
18.
change by natural selection
19.
change by random variation and
natural selection
20.
change by genetic drift
21.
these changes
22.
changes in
23.
emergence
24.
history of life
25.
history of living forms
26.
history of the appearance of life
on earth
27.
emerging history
28.
emerging history of life
29.
appearance
30.
appearance of life
31.
appearance of living forms
32.
historical appearance
33.
development
34.
development of life
35.
origin and development of life
36.
development of living forms
37.
development over time
38.
developmental history
39.
developmental history of life
40.
developmental progress
41.
developmental progression
42.
common descent
43.
universal common descent
44.
limited common descent
45.
descent with modification
46.
origin
47.
origin of living forms
48.
origin of new forms of life
49.
origin of new properties of
living forms
50.
origin and emergence of life
51.
origin and appearance of life
52.
sequence of the origin of each
living form
53.
coming into existence
54.
origin of species
55.
origin of new species
56.
transmutation of species
57.
speciation
58.
species change
59.
species origination and change
60.
an unguided process by which all
life developed
61.
an unbalance in the
Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium
62.
genomic recombination
EVOLVING,
or EVOLUTIONARY (as an adjective):
63.
developing
64.
arising
65.
emerging
66.
appearing
67.
originating
68.
coming into existence
69.
developmental
70.
genetic and/or environmental
71.
environmental
72.
historical
EVOLUTIONARY
HISTORY OF
73. history of
changes in
TO
EVOLVE (as a verb):
74.
to show more rapid changes (more rapid changes shown)
75.
to show changes over time (changes shown over time)
76.
to develop (developed)
77.
to develop over time (developed over time)
78.
to arise (arose)
79.
to arise over time (arose over time)
80.
to emerge (emerged)
81.
to emerge over time (emerged over time)
82.
to appear (appeared)
83.
to appear after (appeared after)
84.
to appear over time (appeared over time)
85.
to originate (originated)
86.
to come into being (came into being)
87.
to come into existence (came into existence)
88.
species to emerge (species emerged)
89.
species to appear (species appeared)
90.
new species to appear (new species appeared)
91.
to change (changed)
92.
to change over time (changed over time)
93.
to change adaptively (adaptively changed)
94.
to show changes (changes shown, showed
changes)
It
is helpful to show how the meaning of the California State Science Framework
could be made clearer.
A good example to begin with is the California Department
of Education Science Framework, Grades Nine Through
Twelve –Biology/Life Sciences. The
evolution portion is sections 7 and 8.
It is titled “Evolution”, but could be more specifically titled:
“History of the appearance of life on earth”.
Section 7 does not use the word, “evolution”, but has six subsections
that deal with natural selection, alleles, mutation, variation, and the
Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium.
Section 8 is titled with the sentence: “Evolution is the result of genetic changes
that occur in constantly changing environments.” This title sentence of section 8 could better
have been written “Changes in life forms can occur as genetic changes occur in
constantly changing environments.” The
problem with the actual framework sentence is that the meaning of the word
“evolution” is insufficiently precise –it could be taken to have any of the
meanings in definitions A-E, (remembering that definitions D and E have
troublesome philosophical implications).
Scientific communication should be written in such a manner as to
minimize the possibility of confusion in the mind of the reader. This is especially true if that reader is a
high school student, and if the confusion involves confusing science with
philosophy.
Section 8 begins with five subsections that are concerned
with differential survival, diversity of species, genetic drift, geographic
isolation, and fossil evidence. Those
five subsections do not use the word “evolution”.
However, subsection 8(f) ends with a phrase “…. to create a
branching diagram (cladogram) that shows probable evolutionary
relationships.” As it stands, the use of
the word “evolutionary” in this sentence, could be
interpreted by the reader to have any of the meanings in definitions B, C, or
D. The use of the word “probable” in
that sentence is very significant. It
allows a student who believes in creation by an intelligent designer to
appreciate the speculative nature of any such diagram. “Evolutionary relationships” in diagrams of
this type indicate only the degree of genetic or structural similarity in
different organisms as they appeared on earth in a historical sequence. To use such branching “cladograms” to convince
anyone that processes which brought life on this planet into existence were
unguided (or undesigned) would be quite misleading. To do so would be to stray
far beyond the legitimate boundary of science. Instead of “probable evolutionary
relationships”, “possible developmental sequences” could be used with far less
confusion of meaning.
Subsection 8(g) ends with “… can help to estimate how long
ago various groups of organisms diverged evolutionarily from one to
another.” In this case, the meaning of the
word “evolutionarily” could again be taken to have the meaning of any of the
five definitions cited earlier. This
sentence could better have ended with “…can help to estimate how long ago
various groups of organisms first appeared.”
Since it will never be possible to completely investigate the entire
fossil record over the entire surface of the earth, any student who wishes to
believe that a creator used guided processes of some kind to bring life as we
know it into existence can do so.
Suppose
a modern biology text were written without using the “e-word” word at all.
Let us suppose that a modern high school
biology textbook were written without ever using the words “evolution”,
“evolutionary”, or “evolve”. For the
moment, ignore the screams of outrage that would come from evolutionists. If such a text were written, to what extent
would it defuse the “minefield” that evolution has become in the minds of most
creationists? Remembering the percentage
of (non-evolutionary) creationist students that sit in the average public high
school biology classroom,
who are more likely to suffer, creationist students or
non-creationist students? How many
non-creationist students would scream “foul” if their textbook didn’t ever use
the word, “evolution”, but was somehow still entirely faithful to the best
scientific evidence and credible hypotheses involved in dealing with the
history of life on earth?
To
test this idea (which would probably be considered absurd by a majority of U.S.
biology teachers), I carefully scrutinized a high school biology textbook used
in the Los Angeles Unified School District.
I found the words, “evolution”, “evolutionary”, “evolve”, or “evolved”
used exactly 150 times on 38 pages of text.
After making a list of 102 more precise synonyms and “synonymic
phrases”, I discovered that I could replace the “e-word” with a more precise
word or phrase 110 times. (The remaining
40 usages could not be substituted because they were in sentences such as “Today,
almost all scientists accept that evolution is the basis for the diversity of
life on Earth.”) I do not believe that
substituting more precise words and phrases for an equivocal word would
decrease the scientific quality of the writing.
If anything, I felt that the precision of the communication process was
improved in the 110 instances in which the “e-word” was replaced. Equivocal words can always be replaced by
other words or phrases that convey a more precise meaning in a scientific
context.