Animals
Intelligent design equals creationism
Editor's note: This column is in response to "Darwin's Deadly Legacy," a program by Coral Ridge Ministries that aired a few weeks ago on WDAM-TV.
Setting aside the contention intelligent design is a scientific theory on par with the theory of evolution through natural selection or the ridiculous notion Charles Darwin is responsible for Hitler, several issues should concern the intelligent design advocate.
First, many intelligent design proponents insist on "teaching the controversy;" i.e., present both sides of the evolution vs. intelligent design debate and allow students to decide for themselves that which is true. Would these intelligent design advocates be as willing to have both sides of other "controversies" such as whether white supremacy is acceptable be presented so students could decide for themselves? Somehow, I don't think so. The responsibility of science educators is to mold young minds with the latest accepted, peer-reviewed scientific knowledge, not to confuse them with socio-religious dogma.
Second, the whole concept of intelligent design reeks of intellectual dishonesty. Intelligent design presupposes that an intelligent designer exists or existed. If this entity exists/existed, He/She/It must have designed or created all that is. This sounds remarkably like creationism, something the courts of this nation have prohibited being taught in our public schools. Proponents of intelligent design would gain more respect for their position if they admitted intelligent design is repackaged creationism rather than to push intelligent design as if it were something new. This repackaging causes speculation as to the true motives of intelligent design proponents.
Lastly, there are certain practical considerations yet to be addressed by those pushing to introduce intelligent design "theory" into the classroom. If all the "facts" are to be presented, who is/are the intelligent designer(s)? What is to be his/her/ its/their purpose for designing all life? What predictions can be made as to future actions of an intelligent designer?
There are numerous mono-theistic religions, such as Judaism, Christianity, Islam and, my personal favorite, Flying Spaghetti Monsterism (whose followers are called "Pastafarians"), all of whom have their own cosmogony. According to the Web site for Wikipedia, the Flying Spaghetti Monster (FSM) is "the deity of a parody religion founded to protest the decision by the Kansas State Board of Education to require the teaching of intelligent design as an alternative to evolution." Also to be included would be various polytheistic religions such as Hinduism and Buddhism, not to mention animism, paganism, etc.
From a truly objective intelligent design viewpoint, all of the designers postulated by these religions must be presented as each is just as valid as the other. Are proponents of intelligent design willing to travel that road? Again, I don't think so. I suspect intelligent design proponents are interested in only the designer of one particular religion.
The search for truth begins with the simple statement "I do not know." Evolutionary theory is the foundation for all biological sciences and meets the tenets of the scientific method: The stating of a problem, the collection of facts through observation and experiment, and the testing of ideas. Proponents of intelligent design will argue evolutionary theory can't be proven. Any reputable scientist will tell you no theory can ever be proven, it can only be strengthened, modified or discarded.
I contend intelligent design theory can meet only the first tenet of the scientific method. Given there are no experiments which can be conducted to collect facts to support the "theory" and no ideas which can be tested, I can only conclude intelligent design is no theory at all.
Bo Alawine, a 1987 graduate of USM, works for a defense contractor on the Gulf Coast. He resides in Ocean Springs.
- Mancat Monday
Daddy is working on a new PROJECT. As chief architect I am carefully examining the draft to make sure he didn't make any design errors. It is important to catch them in the design phase so you don't mess up the project. ~Socks ...
- Middle Name Meme
Socks tagged Scylla and Charlotte tagged Charybdis so we are going to do them both together Scylla will go first.You have to post the rules before you give your answers. You must list one fact about yourself beginning with each letter of your middle name....
- Deep Thoughts
Deep Thought asked thought provoking questions in his post Who Decides? Part II In my introduction to education and homeschooling I discussed my conversation with Prof. Rob Reich, who is seen as an opponent by most homeschoolers, and his view that parents...
- "darwin's Deadly Legacy"
"Darwin's Deadly Legacy" which aired on WDAM-TV Tuesday night is pure fantasy but it managed to stir up plenty of controversy in the Hattiesburg American. According to Gale York, The main point and a non-scientific reply to the two harsh criticisms...
- Why It's Important To Teach Facts Not Feelings
When my kids started kindergarten the latest fad in education was the writing to read program. The students were encouraged to write stories, and were told that spelling wasn't important, to just spell the word however they felt it should be spelt....
Animals
Words of Wisdom From The Big Kahuna
It's with great pride I introduce to you the witty and intelligent (he had the good sense to marry me didn't he) Bo Alawine. His column appeared in the Hattiesburg American today.
Intelligent design equals creationism
Editor's note: This column is in response to "Darwin's Deadly Legacy," a program by Coral Ridge Ministries that aired a few weeks ago on WDAM-TV.
Setting aside the contention intelligent design is a scientific theory on par with the theory of evolution through natural selection or the ridiculous notion Charles Darwin is responsible for Hitler, several issues should concern the intelligent design advocate.
First, many intelligent design proponents insist on "teaching the controversy;" i.e., present both sides of the evolution vs. intelligent design debate and allow students to decide for themselves that which is true. Would these intelligent design advocates be as willing to have both sides of other "controversies" such as whether white supremacy is acceptable be presented so students could decide for themselves? Somehow, I don't think so. The responsibility of science educators is to mold young minds with the latest accepted, peer-reviewed scientific knowledge, not to confuse them with socio-religious dogma.
Second, the whole concept of intelligent design reeks of intellectual dishonesty. Intelligent design presupposes that an intelligent designer exists or existed. If this entity exists/existed, He/She/It must have designed or created all that is. This sounds remarkably like creationism, something the courts of this nation have prohibited being taught in our public schools. Proponents of intelligent design would gain more respect for their position if they admitted intelligent design is repackaged creationism rather than to push intelligent design as if it were something new. This repackaging causes speculation as to the true motives of intelligent design proponents.
Lastly, there are certain practical considerations yet to be addressed by those pushing to introduce intelligent design "theory" into the classroom. If all the "facts" are to be presented, who is/are the intelligent designer(s)? What is to be his/her/ its/their purpose for designing all life? What predictions can be made as to future actions of an intelligent designer?
There are numerous mono-theistic religions, such as Judaism, Christianity, Islam and, my personal favorite, Flying Spaghetti Monsterism (whose followers are called "Pastafarians"), all of whom have their own cosmogony. According to the Web site for Wikipedia, the Flying Spaghetti Monster (FSM) is "the deity of a parody religion founded to protest the decision by the Kansas State Board of Education to require the teaching of intelligent design as an alternative to evolution." Also to be included would be various polytheistic religions such as Hinduism and Buddhism, not to mention animism, paganism, etc.
From a truly objective intelligent design viewpoint, all of the designers postulated by these religions must be presented as each is just as valid as the other. Are proponents of intelligent design willing to travel that road? Again, I don't think so. I suspect intelligent design proponents are interested in only the designer of one particular religion.
The search for truth begins with the simple statement "I do not know." Evolutionary theory is the foundation for all biological sciences and meets the tenets of the scientific method: The stating of a problem, the collection of facts through observation and experiment, and the testing of ideas. Proponents of intelligent design will argue evolutionary theory can't be proven. Any reputable scientist will tell you no theory can ever be proven, it can only be strengthened, modified or discarded.
I contend intelligent design theory can meet only the first tenet of the scientific method. Given there are no experiments which can be conducted to collect facts to support the "theory" and no ideas which can be tested, I can only conclude intelligent design is no theory at all.
Bo Alawine, a 1987 graduate of USM, works for a defense contractor on the Gulf Coast. He resides in Ocean Springs.
Disclaimer: Unless a member of my family is noted as the author only I am responsible for the post in my blog and my views should not be presumed to be the views of other members of my family.
- Mancat Monday
Daddy is working on a new PROJECT. As chief architect I am carefully examining the draft to make sure he didn't make any design errors. It is important to catch them in the design phase so you don't mess up the project. ~Socks ...
- Middle Name Meme
Socks tagged Scylla and Charlotte tagged Charybdis so we are going to do them both together Scylla will go first.You have to post the rules before you give your answers. You must list one fact about yourself beginning with each letter of your middle name....
- Deep Thoughts
Deep Thought asked thought provoking questions in his post Who Decides? Part II In my introduction to education and homeschooling I discussed my conversation with Prof. Rob Reich, who is seen as an opponent by most homeschoolers, and his view that parents...
- "darwin's Deadly Legacy"
"Darwin's Deadly Legacy" which aired on WDAM-TV Tuesday night is pure fantasy but it managed to stir up plenty of controversy in the Hattiesburg American. According to Gale York, The main point and a non-scientific reply to the two harsh criticisms...
- Why It's Important To Teach Facts Not Feelings
When my kids started kindergarten the latest fad in education was the writing to read program. The students were encouraged to write stories, and were told that spelling wasn't important, to just spell the word however they felt it should be spelt....