"evolutionist"

Post Reply New Topic

Do supporters of evolution ever refer to themselves as "evolutionists"? Or is it only a word those who object to evolution use?

There are so "supporters of evolution". Evolution is as real as gravity.
There are no "evolutionists". People who believe in evolution are called "intelligent".

Even many theological scholars, who staunchly adhere to their respective religions, view evolution as being a fact.

It appears to be a word only those who reject science use. The theory of evolution by natural selection isn't an ideology, it's a very specific scientific theory (or law as they were once known) that addresses a very specific question. Typically those '-ists' (capitalist, socialist, DeLeonist, etc) refer to followers of broad ideologies, not merely supporting one scientific theory that makes a fairly limited and specific set of claims. Know any 'stringists'? (string theory) What about 'gravitists'? (theory of gravity)

Sometimes, but my sense is that it's more often used by opponents. It's more descriptive than derogatory. I wouldn't really be bothered if someone called me an evolutionist.

The scientists who study evolution usually use the term "evolutionary biologists" to describe themselves.

You wouldnt call folks who believe that the sky is blue "blue skiests", or folks who accept Newton's theory of gravity Gravitationists" would you? Likewise you would not need a term for folks who don't deny the reality of evolution.

But as a word, "evolutionist" is in fact a natural choice. A student of biology is a biologist, a student of nature is a naturalist (or physicist, from the Greek), a student of genetics is a geneticist. It would be linguistically quite natural to say a student of evolution is an evolutionist. But perhaps for linguistic/euphonic reasons, "evolutionary biologist" is more common today than "evolutionist." Terms change over time, acquiring new connotations and losing old ones. In 50 or 100 years, "evolutionist" could very well replace "evolutionary biologist" as the standard term. (And what creationists call their opponents may well change too.)

But that isn't the question posed by the OP. He is asking about what you call a group folks who don't exist: folks who argue for evolution. And actually- you're talking about a different group of people who ALSO don't exist: as you yourself pretty much said: nobody studies "evolution" as such anyway. They study evolution within particular fields (like linguistics, like biology, like paleontology, like physical anthropology, etc).

Actually the word he is looking for would be "evolution non-denier".

Folks who deny evolution would be the equivalent of "holocaust deniers". So the majority of folks who don't deny evolution would "non deniers".

Kinda like "cisgender people". They had to invent a new term for regular folks who are NOT transgender in the last 18 months because we on the internet talk so damned much about transgender issues lately. Lol!

Yes, I think that's generally right. So returning to the OP, I would say that yes, "evolutionist" as a word is most often used today as a negative term by creationists. Linguistically this need not be so, but in practice it generally is.

Playing more with these words, "evolutionist" might also yield "evolutionism" as a back-formation. "Evolutionism" certainly has a negative connotation as a word -- it's a kind of formation we can see elsewhere: science is good, but scientism is a bad, debased form of science. As a naturally-contrary INTJ evolutionary biologist, I often worry more about evolutionism than I do about creationism.

Such folks might not be a "group" in any kind of formal sense, but such folks surely do exist! If not, there would never be anyone speaking against anything ever said by the opposing "group".

So what do you call them then?

You put an "ist" ending on the end of the word for those who are making a cause.

Creationist are the ones who make a cause out of challenging the accepted belief.

Evolution non deniers are the passive group that defends the default consensus of most sane educated people (that consensus being that evolution happens).

So you cant really call the later group "evolutionists". You could only call them "evolution non deniers" (or "anti evolution deniers").

Unlike "gravitationists" or "blue skiests", Evolutionist is a noun in the English language and its definition according to the Cambridge English Dictionary is; someone who believes in or supports the theory of evolution.

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dict ... olutionist

That includes me.

That description is so loaded with snark that I doubt any such people would want to identified as part of any such group, and that makes anyone who uses that definition an evolutionist.

I reject linguistic prescriptivism. People use it, ergo it is a word. No one can demand that words must have specific, sensible definitions and consistent usage. People use evolutionist as an insult, like they use Darwinist. In fact, some people decry Darwinists but feel okay about evolutionists.

For the most part, religious people don't care to have specific, sensible definitions of certain terms of art. With good reason. Some things, a person just has to experience before talking about, and even then they may come across as vague.

Most of the time, I've seen the term "Darwinist" used in a neutral fashion---to denote an adherent of the theory of natural selection as an impetus to evolution.