"Because in Cyberspace, no one can hear you scream."
Tuesday, August 02, 2005
[Media Source*] (Hat Tip: Evolution News)
(AP) President Bush said Monday he believes schools should discuss "intelligent design" alongside evolution when teaching students about the creation of life...
"I think that part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought," Bush said. "You're asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, the answer is yes."
Although one may conclude that this is nothing more than a push for "right wing religious teaching" in the public arena, the real debate center's on whether or not evolution is credible enough to be taught within the pubic school system without serious critique. If evolution is a credible belief system, let it undergo some questioning and if it is founded upon fact, then the atheist's should have nothing to worry about.
Ironically it seems as if the pro-evolutionist crowd is trying to silence the debate before it even begins. This may be due to the fact that many scientists are leaving this once highly esteemed belief system as some are doubting this theory when examined under the microscope of science.
While the evolutionists continue their tired celebrations of the Scopes trial, they glance anxiously over their shoulders. They are running scared, and as the list of scientists and thinkers who dissent from Darwinism grows -- the Discovery Institute lists hundreds of scientists who now regard it as an intellectually bankrupt theory -- the evolutionists will increasingly mirror the intolerance they used to bemoan.
If those endorsing evolution as fact desire this debate to evaporate then they are going to have to allow room for public examination of this theory. Science is the art of testing presumptions to determine whether or not they are truth and if evolution is deemed as fact, let America discover it and move on.
If proven otherwise, let the public judge this theory and if necessary replace it with one that works according to science. After all, we have nothing to lose by examining the facts, as the truth is more important than our opinions.
Deutsch â¢ EspaÃ±ol â¢ FranÃ§ais â¢ Italiano â¢ Portugese â¢ æ¥æ¬èª â¢ íêµ â¢ æ±è¯
I find it odd, given your obvious interest in science that you fail to recognize that evolutionary theory is undergoing constant examination, like any other theory in science. Certainly, our understanding of evolution today is not the same as that in the mid-19th century.
Second, the problem with ID as an alternative is that it is not a scientific theory. It is a philosophical theory. In the end, the argument for a Creator or Creators is similar Aquinas' reasoning for a Creator: everything to have progenitor, so to the universe. Of course, like Aquinas, the IDers beliefs - as a scientific theory - fall apart at this point because they cannot offer up the Creator for testing, for evaluation, and must make a special case for the existence of the Creator as the unmade maker.
Of course, there are hypothetical constructs in other areas of science. But, these are proposed with the built-in assumption that at some point - as our technology advances or as our understanding of other natural laws increases - these hypotheses will eventually be tested. This is not the case with the Creationist/ID camp.
And, please note, I am not arguing against the belief in a Creator in a philosophical/religious sense. I am saying that trying to use ID as a n alternative theory for the development of life or an alternate cosmological theory is inappropriate since it is not science.
If those who find evolutionary theory unsatisfactory can offer up an alternative set of hypothesis that adhere to the scientific method, than they should. But, any hypothesis that relies up a supernatural and untestable agent cannot lead to a scientific theory, only a philosophical one.
If the IDers wish to see their ideas and those of Muslims, Hindus, Buddhist, African animists, etc as well as beliefs now gone, examined in the context of a comparative cultures class, than I would have no problem with that. But, that is not what they are pushing for. Whether it is what the President meant, I don't know. Certainly, it seems like he was endorsing the idea of offering ID as an alternative to evolutionary theory and doesn't seem to realize that they are apples and oranges. But, that is just my impression.
Anyway, just my 2 cents.
Comment Policy: Comments posted here do not necessarily reflect the views of this site or the authors, and are the legal responsibility of the original commenter. Intelligent opinions welcome. Comment here.
By Darnell Clayton â¢ 11:39 PM â¢ Email Post â¢ â¢
Enter your email address below to subscribe.
View Blog Stats
Plus 10,667 hits before August 12, 2005
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License.
Opinions expressed here do not reflect the views of anyone that I work with, for, or associate with in any manner.