Wednesday, August 10, 2005

The Washington Examiner presents an article about "intelligent design," written by Robert Vanasse. The key sentence: "Discussion of varying views of the creator, or the 'intelligent designer,' belongs in the humanities, not in sciences classes."

ID should be (if at all) debated in philosophy classes and the like, with students questioning and wondering aloud, in search of answers to questions which very often have no answers. Science is based on facts and those things that can be proven. Alas, ID, by definition, does not fall under this category and therefore should not be taught in the same realm as science.

Assuming those who advocate ID are generally religious minded and Bible followers, then how can they endorse ID as a means to explaining evolution when in fact Genesis portrays no evolution of any sort, but rather Adam, Eve, the Garden of Eden, etc.? According to Genesis, there never was a Cromagnum man or a Mesopotamia, so which is it then? They seem to want evolution explained AND Adam & Eve -- can't have it both ways. (But then this is an argument of logic, i.e. for a humanities class).

No comments: