Quick Links to Posts By Category

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
, , , , , ,
, , , , , , , , , , , , ,
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, October 26, 2005

Creating the Intelligence of Origin

To clarify my previous post, while the theory of Intelligent Design is consistent with the Theory of Creation, it does not imply it. Nor does including Intelligent Design in the classroom equate to the inclusion of the Theory of Creation.

Intelligent Design is the concept that intelligence somehow played a role in the design of living organisms. It is in contrast with the Theory of Evolution which suggests that living organisms evolved through a series of accidental mutations that were “selected” to survive through the “survival of the fittest”.

To study the Theory of Evolution together with the theory of Intelligent Design is to examine both sides of the issue. It serves to study the evidence and the hypotheses behind each – much of which may contradict the other. (Ok, some do hypothesize that both theories may work together such that intelligence played a role in designing the accidental mutations.)

The Theory of Creation seeks to identify the “who”, the “how”, and the “why” behind the intelligence. It requires an act of religious faith that may best be studied under the guidance of the faithful.

To be clear, including Intelligent Design in the classroom does not mean including the Theory of Creation. But, it does mean a more rounded curriculum surrounding the science of origin.


There are scientists who support both theories of Evolution and of Intelligent Design. To pretend otherwise is to foster ignorance – or perhaps a demonstration thereof.

A primer for the science of origin would be incomplete without a study of both theories. While I find the theory of Intelligent Design more palpable and more fitting of the evidence, I still recognize that scientists more educated than I subscribe to the Theory of Evolution. I take no issue with presenting their work to our students.

The vehement opposition to introducing the work of “Intelligent Design” scientists into the classroom is illogical. It smacks more of an emotional response against that which one does not understand and less of a rational argument for the legitimate study origin.


Blogger John said...

Wow. And all this time, I thought it was the Intelligent Design camp who are feeding on the fears of people who don't understand evolution.

You know, it's really quite interesting how all of your posts toe the Conservative-Republican line. On every issue. It must feel good to fit into that socio-political framework so perfectly. That way, if you haven't had time to come up with your own opinion, one will be quickly provided. And you can just try and come up with an argument for it. It must be comforting.

10/30/2005 7:54 PM  
Blogger G-man said...

Newsflash: Conservatives tend to agree on social and political issues. It’s in our contract. If we don’t agree and sound like, well, conservatives, then we stop getting our Halliburton checks.

10/31/2005 12:12 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home


MOB Logo

Powered by Blogger