The Politics and Science of Intelligent Design
Posted on: Monday, 29 August 2005, 12:00 CDT
It sounds so reasonable: The theory of evolution is such a divisive subject that students should learn about the controversy in the classroom.
Its a new and seductive appeal by acolytes of so-called intelligent design, a theory that says the world is too complicated to be caused by chance and changes, the processes that Charles Darwin used to explain natural selection.
Adherents of the theory say the only logical explanation for natures amazing complexity is a designer who put it all together. They claim that free and fair scientific and academic inquiry demands the teaching of such intelligent design theory as a possible explanation for the world and that free speech demands that science teachers have an opportunity to talk about it.
Thats all President Bush was saying a couple of weeks ago. And Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist more recently. They just think schools should teach the intelligent design controversy along with the theory of evolution. Kids deserve to hear all sides.
Again, it sounds so reasonable. But its not.
Intelligent design believers and their many Christian followers are intentionally mistaking an age-old theological controversy for a modern scientific one.
Teaching evolution that man, among other creatures, descended from lesser beasts has always caused tremendous consternation among those who believe in the literal truth of the Genesis story, which says that God created man in His image.
That controversy is one of the enduring ones in American society, but it is not a scientific one. It is a cultural and religious dispute. There is no scientific evidence that God created man, in his image, in strict accordance with the Bible story. There is, similarly, no scientific evidence that a designer created the world. Belief in either story as fact comes from faith, and faith alone.
There is ample evidence, however, that countless creatures, including man, evolved over time from one form into another. With enough time a species will adapt to changing conditions and be transformed or disappear.
That process can be seen in the laboratory and in the fossil record, though its not really obvious in our daily lives. But thats a proof of evolutions shakiness the same way a line at the horizon proves the Earth is flat. Its a failure of our vision, not of the theory.
No matter what intelligent design advocates say, absolutely no legitimate scientific dispute exists over the role of evolution and natural selection in the creation and development of the world. None.
To teach otherwise would be to introduce simple sophistry in Americas science classes at a time when the countrys students lag their brothers and sisters across the world.
If, as a society, the nation decides it essential to find a place for the evolution controversy in the classroom and it should it deserves to be taught as a political issue in a history or philosophy class, not as science.
Source: Virginian - Pilot
Related Articles
- Designing Intelligent Knowledge: Epistemological Faith and the Democratization of Science
- Understanding Intelligent Design and Evolution: Whatever the Outcome of the Dover Trial, Metanexus Institute Advocates a New Look at Science Education -- For All Ages
- By Design, Anti-Evolution Theory Creates Debate
- Scientific Societies Support Teaching Evolution
- Lack of Intelligence in Design Arguments ; Evolution May Need Improvement, but ID Isn't a True Scientific Theory.
- Kansas Evolution Debate Challenges Science Itself
- Evolution and Evidence
- Intelligent Design Has No Place in a Science Course
- Darwin and Design: Does Evolution Have a Purpose?
- Science creates she-male human hybrid; Anger at embryo experiment
 |
 |
User Comments (0)
RSS Feeds