"It's just a theory"
 

There are no four words that are more offensive to me than these.
It pisses me off so much I have actually already three times interrupted whichever idiot says this in classes just to scold them. It really makes me happy that the professors don't stop me, but it really makes me sad that I still fucking hear those words in upper division college classes.
If any of you has used those words and you think you're making a legitimate argument, please raise your hand so I can give you a proper and more argumentatively legitimate "fuck off."

I have never, and I never felt the desire to. But now I am intrigued and wish to hear just how you can tell me to fuck off. Please do feel free to pretend that I just used them.

Hey, Alan! That mathematical formula created by Pythagoras or his followers ...

it's just a theorem.

Alan, i feel your pain. When i was in High School, we learned about evolution. There was two kids in my class that refuse to believe anything the teacher said and had all these bull-shit retorts. It usully wen like this:

Religious kids: Were you there?
Me: Were you?

RK: Prove it
Me: You first

RK: Its just a Theory
Me: Its just a story book

Teacher like me so i got away with it.

One of the reasons such unscientific and illogical attitudes persist in modern times is the difference in the delivery to young and naive minds:

A) Science: The student, in a classroom with 40 other students (it used to be much fewer) is under pressure with tests and lab work to get passing grades for demonstrating understanding, and is in many cases relieved to get the bloody hell out of the class.

B) Church: The member merely sits and listens, no pressure, no tests, no oral regurgitation to demonstrate understanding, and so this is the most easily learned view, despite the unscientific content of the message.

Results: uninformed people making flippant comments based on what they liked and were comfortable with learning instead of facts which remind them of unpleasant circumstances.

Again, this is just one among multiple reasons for today's ignorance of science and its vernacular.

Another important factor in this sad state of poor scientific understanding is that the churches have made a successful power grab by turning churches into a unified political organization, thus poorly influencing elected officials and their subsequent legislation. They scream "separation of church and state" when their power or money is threatened but hypocritically ignore this when it comes to telling members how to vote (California's Prop. 8 for example).

In a strange twist of fate, there is no danger of society falling into a new Dark Age, as corporate entities strive for more advanced scientific knowledge, driven by the profit incentive of obtaining patents on new discoveries. The rich get smarter and the poor get dumber. Sad.

HumanePain, there is a great deal of truth to your post. However, I'd like to bring up one point related to the above statement which is seldom discussed.

It seems that in contemporary Western culture, a sort of "rationalism" is becoming the dominant force (though I admit that there is still a great deal of idealism present too). Intelligence, education, and intellectual might are considered to be the noblest traits one can posess. The fact that even on these forums, insults are 99% of the time targetted at the opponent's intelligence supports this fact. Wisdom and intelligence have always been respected and always will be, but it's as if other virtues such as respect, integrity, honesty, compassion, loyalty, self-sacrifice, etc are no longer valued at all in our society. I suppose that these traditional virtues are seen as weak and unprofitable. In other words: I can be the most rude, self-centred, vile, vulgar, cruel-hearted scoundrel, but as long as I'm smart enough to prove everyone else wrong and step on them to get what I want, that's all that really matters; afterall, this is only logical.

Putting our society into perspective, history shows that human culture is always in a state of flux. As an art student, I've studied how one cultural movement gains strength and momentum only to eventually degrade and be replaced by another movement. We shouldn't be arrogant and naive. To believe that our intellectual, rationalistic worldview is so great that it will never be replaced by another is akin to believing that because "sagging" pants look so "cool", they'll surely never go out of style. (That statement wasn't directed at you, HumanePain).

Even if we in our generation will never change, our children or their children certainly will once they tire of the undeniable problems that our current way causes. It's human nature to try to find a better way. Make no mistake: we are not the future; we are just the present ~ one link in the long chain of human civilization. Thus, I believe that another "Dark Age" is certainly possible.

I agree, as we dissect this further I must explain that I am a follower of Jesus, and am not attacking individual faiths or spiritual beliefs.

Yes, society must have not only logic and science, but compassion, forgiveness, empathy and other noble virtues that are outside the realm of science, if not society would self destruct as the individual motive becomes paramount as you explained.

My issue is with the ignorance of the scientific method which leads to comments that Alan criticizes, "it's only a theory". This is a statement made in ignorance of what the word theory means.

What my position leans towards in terms of proposed solutions is increased funding of education, so that the classroom is at least on equal footing with the church pew. A teacher to student ratio of say, 1 to 20 would be a great improvement, more computers in classrooms so that students may improve their vocabulary (which, as Samuel Johnson once said "is the dressing of thought") and thus not only avoid such ignorant comments described by Alan, but make well informed decisions.

Are we talking about using "its just a theory" to discredit a scientific theory, thus being an idiot for not understanding how scientific theory works, or are we talking about using "its just a theory" to justify the most idiotic outlandish offensive idea? Both are infuriating, mind you.

I'm guessing scientific theory, that what I was talking about.

The latter was what Alan mentioned in his first post.
At least that is the impression I got.
I must wholeheartedly agree though. You cannot justify your bullshit by claiming it a theory.
A proper theory is - for all intents and purposes - proven in a logical way.
A proper idiot stating something to be a theory usually just spew out what they would like to believe to be reality.
"Hey guys, it's just a theory, but if we break into the bank and kick the door of the vault down, we can get rich!"

I thought Alan meant people using "It's only a theory" to dismiss whatever it was you were saying like it doesn't matter.

A theory is ment to be challenged. I'm sure Pathagoras would be tickled pink if he were wrong. Proof of disproof before proof of proof.

Alan I'm sorry but if it IS a theory then expect challenge if you present it to a college of your peers. If it has a perpose to be called then they may not see it.

Pythagoras.

I pierced my ear yesterday and it hurts!:-(

Is Alan an English teacher?

Challenge the premises of the theory; the validity of the experiment, or present alternate explanations that would render the theory useless.
DO NOT, however, be stupid enough to believe that by just saying "it's just a theory" you can just pretend that the theory means nothing.

Ah, like that.
Well people who dismiss your arguments by saying that you could be wrong are just people without anything reasonable to say really.
However, if you have successfully shot down a theory or proven that it is just as likely to be wrong, that is where you are entitled to the four words.

Yes, IF you are a peer scientist who has spent an equally long lifetime of research and investigation and gathering of facts and evidence. The issue Alan and I have is with folks who have not even gotten their feet wet in logic and science dismissing theory which has been painstakingly assembled by world wide bodies of experts, and have independently repeated experiments (achieving the same results). Even then, one must be careful about claiming to have "shot down" a theory. Newtonian physics do fail to explain events at relativistic velocities but they still hold true at sub-light speeds.

That's true.

How the hell did I miss this entire discussion? I feel like a small child who's been left at a store by accident. *sniff* :'(

Strange, I haven't heard anyone say that for years. But there are students at my university reading veterinary science who think evolution is wrong, and I wouldn't be surprised if they say "it's just a theory".

Wow Ok a story book that is true.

Shut the fuck up, dude.

Fuck you you Nazi book burning Fahrenheit 451 illiterate bastard.

This is a thread about complaining about idiots who say bullshit pretending they have a legitimate argument and you come and post bullshit like that?
Don't disgrace yourself here.