Is it the theory of evolution or evolution?

I received this communication from this individual that reached out.

Laying out the context for this thread.

My obliged for your invitation. 

A straightforward question to start this off.

What makes the theory of evolution a theory?

Thanks for accepting! So, the theory of evolution is a scientific theory that explains how species change over time through the process of natural selection and random mutations. In science, a theory is a well-substantiated explanation based on evidence and observations. It goes through several stages to become a scientific theory:

1. Observation: Scientists observe patterns or phenomena in the natural world, like the diversity of species.

2. Hypothesis: They propose a hypothesis to explain the observations, like the idea that species change over time.

3. Testing: Scientists conduct experiments, gather data, and analyze evidence to test the hypothesis.

4. Peer Review: The research and findings undergo rigorous evaluation by other experts in the field.

5. Consistency and Predictability: The hypothesis must consistently explain the observed data and make accurate predictions.

6. Broad Consensus: If the hypothesis is supported by a large body of evidence and is widely accepted by the scientific community, it can be elevated to a scientific theory.

Now, the term "theory" in everyday language can mean a guess or speculation. But in science, a theory is different. It's a comprehensive explanation that is backed by substantial evidence and has stood up to rigorous testing and scrutiny. For example, the theory of gravity or the theory of relativity are well-established theories with overwhelming evidence, even though we use the term "theory." They are indeed a fact. Like I said in science the word theory is used as a highest standard of certainty since the next step would be to claim absolute truth with no room for improvement which scientists don’t do because they are not ignorant.

It's not just a random guess, but a well-supported explanation that has shaped our understanding of the natural world. Grounded on facts. Facts.

Its also relevant what is a hypothesis while we are on the topic.

There are, however, remarkable exceptions with regard to the ability of the fish to interbreed and produce viable offspring – and that exactly what makes them so interesting to evolutionary biologists. One such exception – referred to as repeatedly evolved species pair – is distinct marine and freshwater stickleback forms, also called ecotypes.

Remember, before you say something of the sorts of “hhaaaa see it says “guess” in the definition of hypothesis so therefore the whole theory is a guess”

The creation of the hypothesis comes from an idea yes but thats only a part of the process. The beginning. Also this idea has to be grounded on something like we said. After that it has to be tested and verified to be considered a reasonable hypothesis and to move forward to the other stages of becoming a coherent scientific theory. At the end after its confirmed and tried to be disproved unsuccessfully by the scientific community it is established as a theory that describes something of our world. Based on facts. Like the fact that atomic bombs work and they are based on the atomic theory that describes atoms and how they work. Atomic theory is still “a theory” doesn’t mean what you think it means. Atomic theory is a fact and if you knew a little bit about evolution you would know that it is even better established that all of the other theories that you probably have no problem in believing. Like the germ theory. I hope you agree germs exist. We know that from a THEORY that seems pretty damn accurate so far considering we have no problem curing thousands of diseases.

So much for straightforward.

So the theory of evolution is the same as saying the fact of evolution.

Is that it?

But everything outside of that conveniently is not a fact when it's called a theory.

Yes, same thing. Saying Evolution or Theory of Evolution has absolutely no difference.

Everything outside of what and what is everything that is not a fact and is a scientific theory ? Please remember the word “scientific” which is in-front of “theory”.

Anything else that is not about evolution that is called theory is actually a theory and not fact.

That makes no sense. I told you there are multiple other scientific theories that are facts as well. And outside of the scientific field when you use “theory” in an everyday conversation, normal people mean “an idea” by that. The difference between scientific theory and theory is that the first is a term used by scientists that means more than a mere idea. Scientific theories were first an idea, then a hypothesis, then they were tested and tried to be falsified etc, eventually if it passes all the experiments, if the hypothesis has been verified, scientists have gathered vast amounts of evidence and facts , they can establish a scientific theory. I hope you now understand how what you mean by theory and what science means by theory is not the same thing. When I say I have a theory of how to make money out of funny shaped rocks this is not the same as when scientists talk about scientific theories.

So from what you're saying the word "theory" is just a synonym for the word fact. It's just another word for fact.

Is that it?

Brother….. for the hundred time.. SCIENTIFIC THEORY is a fact yes. The word “theory” outside of science means something else.Scientific theory is a term which is used by scientists to explain BODY OF FACTS AND WHAT they mean. 

Yes, a scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world and universe that can be repeatedly tested and corroborated in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results.

there are cases where competing theories describe the same observations

like string-theory and quantum-gravity and MOND

a generally accepted scientific theory is our current BEST DESCRIPTION of observations

not exactly the same as "a fact"

for example

particle physics is a description of reality on the microscopic scale

but it is not the only description

and electrons don't look like tiny billiard balls

and they don't "spin" "around" a nucleus

they are detectable in a probabilistic quantum pattern that we approximate with the word "spin"

Yes you’re correct, although I wouldn’t say the string theory is a “scientific theory” in the same way. It is not our best observation / description of what it tries to explain and its just a theoretical framework still very far away from being established as the “theories” discussed here. 

What has been said about sentience and how it evolved  in the evolutionary discussions?

Define “sentience”

"feeling or sensation as distinguished from perception and thought"  "Self awareness" "The ability to articulate ones own existence to another"

Relax brother . Let's have a laid back exchange and it roll off your back like how I do .

Now that we're all here...

I have a number of questions.

We'll start off with these three .

So the "theory"of evolution is not very well known or is it just rejected?

Do religions just reject this "fact" or are religious folks just ignorant to it?

The "theory" (fact) of water being wet is pretty widely accepted. But this "fact" of evolution is not, why?

When you talk about science, does that involve empiricism?

Please answer yes or no .

Please be as concise and precise as possible.

Theory of Evolution is one of the most solid theories in science . It is well known and it is accepted from all of the scientific community. Endless number of scientist have tried to disprove it as part of the testing process but nobody has succeed in "rejecting it". It is proven by biology,  geology, paleontology,  chemistry, comparative anatomy, embryology , biogeography and more. It is so well established and known that if you throw half of the evidence it will still be one of the most coherent and verified theories. 

I wont speculate why they reject it. They are multiple reasons. Some do some don't. Some Christians do some don't.  Christians who deny evolution are mostly the people who take the bible literally and reject all kind of science that contradicts the Bible (even hard proof). Those religious people I speculate are very likely a minority and are mainly in USA. The fundamentalists. I might be wrong about the statistics tho.

Evolution is accepted and it is rejected mainly by Muslims and fundamental Christians like protestants. I wont make any guesses about other religions. Ill leave the water being wet for someone else to answer. 

Yes. Science does involve empiricism?

Well Evolution does not deal with that specific question precisely but it does give us some ideas. I dont know much about it so if someone here has more education in neuro science or evolutionary biology they can probably give a better answer. From my understanding evolutionary biology suggests that over time, our ancestors underwent changes that led to the development of larger and more complex brains. These changes allowed for the emergence of higher cognitive functions, such as self-awareness and complex thought. The evolution of sentience may have been driven by factors like the need to navigate social interactions and solve problems. As humans developed the ability to communicate and cooperate, our brains and cognitive abilities continued to evolve, leading to the development of language, culture, and advanced thinking skills. There’s obviously a lot more details to this and every factor can be analyzed separately. From social interactions and problem-solving, the development of tools and technology, the ability to create and use tools allowed our ancestors to manipulate their environment and solve problems more effectively, which likely contributed to the growth of their cognitive abilities.

this is fun to watch unfold 

Evolution is a word that describes a process.

Species evolution was a theory put forwards by Charles Darwin.

Material evolution is the process of material change from beginning to end, and species evolution either is or is not a phase thereof.

Though I would suggest that, as material evolution is clearly demonstrable, then it is likely that species evolution is a reasonable proposition.

OK,  sentience  just evolved. Like a bird beak.

Words are often used differently in science than they are in every day life. When someone says "I have a theory", what they really mean is "I have a hypothesis". But I suspect people started using the word theory to describe this because hypothesis sounds nerdy and geeky. Theory has a better ring to it.

In science, a theory is a framework for which a set of facts is explained. Much like a hypothesis, except in science for something to be called a theory it has to be proven. So when you say evolution is "just a theory" that's like saying "all the prosecution did was prove their case".

Yeah, although not sure if it was exactly like a bird beak. Maybe.

by very simply selectively breeding the LEAST aggressive wild foxes

after only about seven generations (7 years) the purebred wild foxes develop floppy ears and patchy fur and playful attitudes like traditionally domesticated dogs

From what I'm understanding and being told is that the word theory is another word for fact .

So this is not just on the subject of science alone.

Now people may use the term however they use it.