WASHINGTON — 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.â€
To teach “Intelligent Design” in a science class would simply be unscientific.
Science is a philosophy in search of truth, not truth itself. It consists of theories, which must be scientifically proven. Then, the most solid theory is accepted by the community. Evolution is one such theory, but also one that has been validated/proven over and over.
Intelligent Design, however, remains a theory that cannot be proven. That in itself does not mean that it is wrong or non-existant, but scientifically it is a very weak argument. It is a case of two thousand year old scriptures vs. modern experiments.
If Bush wants “Intelligent Design” taught in a religion class, or in a class that is dedicated to studying alternative theories of the beginnings of life – that’s fine with me. But if he wants it taught alongside evolution in a science class as a theory that is just as plausible, then I have a problem.
Comments
2 responses to “Intelligent Design Debate”
I think you are confusing Intelligent Design with Creationism. Intelligent Design, does not come from misinterpretations of religous mythologies, and It has people of numerous different belif systems such as Atheists, Deists, Taoists, Daoists, Hindus, Muslims, Buddhists, Christianst, etc. Try checking out Intelligent Design forums for yourself if you want to check this out.
And I quote from the Discovery Institute:
Intelligent Design is “certain features of the universe and of living things exhibit the characteristics of a product resulting from an intelligent cause or agent, as opposed to an unguided process such as natural selection.”
Unless the implications is that the “intelligent cause or agent” is an alien, then it must be a “higher being” aka. God.
My problem isn’t with people that believe in God; or people that believe that God created the universe. My problem is with people that want to destroy science classes. They do so by making it irrelevant, by undermining the very scientific process on which it is based. How do you make science irrelevant? By equating theories that have no tangible evidence or repeatable observations to back them with those that do.
Science does not pertain to be the absolute truth. It’s a philosophy of doing things, and one that has served us well. Without it, I can tell you that medical and technological advancements will be alot harder.