my question: what is a "kind"?

i've asked this repeatedly and nobody has ever given me a straight answer

i know it's not species, because people retreat to the "kind =/= species" argument when they're given irrefutable proof of speciation

so what is a "kind"?

well, i'm asking the creationists. the bible states that animals produce "after their own kind"
but the term "kind" is not defined and i've never, ever seen it defined.

imagine all the dogs in the world. Got it?

Noah took 2 wolves. That's it.

it does seem to be a definition posted above, and as well to natural selection,etc....once you have one of anything, it becomes a "kind" . Anything can be a kind and then you can see more of that "kind"...potentially?? Unless it is "one of a kind" , which still means you have one that can become a group of something..

Originally posted by JPhish
imagine all the dogs in the world. Got it?

Noah took 2 wolves. That's it.

And 2 Thylacines

How many beetles did he take? And don't say 2 - because that'd be like saying he took 2 birds. And we know he took more than 2 birds

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
my question: what is a "kind"?

i've asked this repeatedly and nobody has ever given me a straight answer

i know it's not species, because people retreat to the "kind =/= species" argument when they're given irrefutable proof of speciation

so what is a "kind"?

Depends on whether you buy into the communist or national socialist interpretation of this term.

A communist would argue that people are divided into "kinds" in terms of classes. I.e that classes divide us more than race.

A national socialist (nazi), would say that race is the ultimate division line of "kind".

I take "kind" to mean species when applied to animals; subspecies in the case of domesticated animals and nationality when applied to humans.

If someone says that "people should stick to their own kind", he could mean their social class, their race or their nationality.

A zebra would be considered to be in the horse kind as you are able to cross a zebra and a horse and produce offspring. Remember that the classification system that we use isn't the same system that God uses.

"For my thoughts are not your thoughts,
neither are your ways my ways, declares the LORD."
Isaiah 55:8

And a thylacine

And as for those beetles ..... can you mate a dung beetle with a ladybird?

You are confused about species and kinds because in the Renaissance period scietists came up with a classification system of species, genuis, kind, family, etc. that is based on their observations of animals. So when you see kind in the Bible, it is not the same meaning of scientific classification. The scientists themselves argue about the exact breakdown of the classification system today, so how confused will the general public be? lol

Anyway, you can be sure a species will be able to mate with others of the same species even if it the species has changes within itself. For example, a wolf and a German Shepard can breed. Trying to breed a housecat with a dog wont work, even if they accepted your idea of trying that. An animal mates within its own species (scientific), which the Bible refers to as kind which predates the scientific terminology. There are a few exceptions to the rule where breeding isn't possible, but that does not negate what the Bible defines as 'kinds'.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul

so what is a "kind"?

Well, as much as i would enjoy slapping a dictionary definition down and telling you to read more, i think you might be more interested in how people in this day and age make usage of the term 'kind'.

As always with dialect, terminology is something that has evolved over time, and in this instance this specific terminology has probably come about as a result of people getting the wrong idea.

Except of course, in this instance getting the wrong idea means that we have a rather substantual glitch in our social lexicon that has been never successfully been addressed in an environment where decisions are made and actions are carried out.

As you can see, getting the wrong idea is a dangerous thing, if you don't know whether or not you're getting the wrong idea.

But where did the idea come from, i hear you ask?

Simple - the modern masses have looked at the word 'Human-kind' and assumed* it means that all humans are one of a kind.

They fail to understand the depth of meaning, as the masses often do when faced with anything that requires historical insight.



*Hench why fools who assume they have good ideas aren't allowed to speak on critical points.



The line between a good idea and a bad idea is deadly precise.


[edit on 26-4-2008 by Anti-Tyrant]