Saturday, February 28, 2009
Intelligent design
It's not creationism. Then what is it? The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection. There is controversy whether this theory should be taught in schools along with evolution. Do you agree or disagree?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Intelligent Design and Creationism should be taught in the social studies classroom, not the natural sciences. They are perfectly acceptable in the schools, but because they are not based in scientific method or explanations of the world through the lens of a scientist, then they should not be in the natural science classroom. They are, however, perfectly fair game in the social studies because they offer a fascinating view about how people explain their world.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion it wouldn't be a problem to teach Intelligent Design in a Science class. May be not at middle school level but high school students are mature enough to decide for themselve what they believe and what not.
ReplyDeleteAfter I read both Oregoncornhusker's and annika's comments, I am less sure of what I think. Intelligent Design has a lot of people talking, and it is a theory that lends itself well to comparison to many others. Wouldn't the consideration of it lead to higher order thinking? As far as it being science, that seems to come and go as the decades roll by. Not so long ago everyone thought Darwinism was the gospel. Now not so much.
ReplyDeleteIntelligent design requires that you accept a supernatural explanation for a natural phenomenon. This is not science. Science uses the "Scientific method" to develop a natural explanation for natural phenomenon. How can you test an intelligent designer (God). Can you get the designer to repeat the results of your test and what happens when God decides that enough is enough and no more miracles just so that you can test your hypothesis? Evolution is a scientific theory which means that a preponderance of evidence supports the theory and no evidence disproves it. Scientists accept the theory and continue to discuss details regarding the theory but not the validity of the theory itself.
ReplyDelete