Close Topic Options

Intelligent Design

SCHOOLS BALK AT 'INTELLIGENT DESIGN' STUDY

If human evolution is taught in biology class, then the idea of an intelligent force creating the universe ought to be taught in philosophy or another required class, a Utah senator told state school officials Wednesday.
Ref. https://deseretnews.com/dn/view/1%2C1249%2C...54989%2C00.html

Design Intelligent

I have shared my views on this in other posts, but I don't see anything wrong with teaching the material presented here. Just as the topic of sex education in schools, people have their own views about sex education (from religious POVs) and don't want their children hearing otherwise by some other source.
I think I use crazy examples sometimes, but picture a cooking class in high school. If the teacher insists for her class she wants you to use garlic in making your roast, you put garlic in it. Even if your mom at home says you should only use salt and pepper, for the purpose of that lesson, you make your roast with garlic and that's it! What's the big deal?
For the purpose of educating a well rounded student, teach them how everyone views how we obtained life, not just one. I do agree with the article that the idea of Intelligent Design should be offered in a class like Philosophy, as it would not be appropriate in Science.

Intelligent Design UFO & Writing Art Education Sciences

EVOLUTION STATEMENT EXCLUDES 'DESIGN'

The state school board's proposed position statement on teaching evolution doesn't give an inch for a state senator's "intelligent design" concepts.
Ref. https://deseretnews.com/dn/view/1%2C1249%2C...58989%2C00.html

Design Intelligent

Teaching Intelligent Design is the most sanitized, atheistic way of acknowledging an overarching reason for the existence of life. One would think that proposing the idea to students that biology, quantum physics, chemistry, and philosophy are connected and interdependent would appeal to most logical people. However, staunch Darwinian evolutionists have the audacity to proclaim that their theory is not only the best, but the ONLY logical and teachable answer to the question of origin. Indeed, according to the so-called Intelligent Design theory, evolution may well have occurred as a part of the plan of a higher consciousness. Isn't it ironic that we teach the religious creation stories of ancient Rome and Greece in our literature classes, the creation accounts of various indigenous tribes as part of history, and the creation story of the atheists in science classes, and yet the mere mention of an "Intelligent Design," a concept that falls short of even defining the fact of a Creator, is seen by school boards and parents as too risky, too speculative, too religious. On the contrary, Intelligent Design is not a religious concept. It is too vague a concept to have any religious substance, except perhaps for those religions that believe everything, thus encompassing it in the same way they encompass the New York Yankees.

To those who vehemently oppose Intelligent Design, I ask, WHAT IS THE HARM? To teach that the entire universe is a unified system is logically sound. Let the students decide for themselves, with open-ended options laid before them. Science supports the idea of universal organization, and it is not a far step to conjecture that some force or idea unites the entire system.

Design Intelligent

Yes, we teach creation stories of literature (the bible is still literature) in LITERATURE class, not in science class. Keep in mind, only one version of ID is being pushed by the church and evangelists like Pat Robertson.

ID is not based off of proven scientific method. Think its flawed? It is, but technology would be in the dark ages along with medicine without it. As said before, the groups pushing ID are religious groups, it will never be so antiseptic as teaching a logically unified universe. If that were there case, why is the new-age/eastern teaching that the earth was created by a life force that we are all part of going to be taught? They teach exactly the antiseptic version of ID that you are talking about. You cant honestly believe that the conservative right wing push of ID would except that as a teaching, not when christian churches are talking about it in the pulpits as it gets voted on and approved by the board. Christians are saying ID being taught is their foothold in school and that this is a victory for God. IF God is not the center of ID, then its not a victory. To think ID is going to be taught outside of religion is fantasy.

Intelligent Design

'Intelligent design': What do scientists fear?

What I find curious about this debate, not only in Pennsylvania, but in Kansas and throughout the country, is that so many scientists and educators are behaving like fundamentalist secularists. Only they will define science. They alone will decide which scientific theories and information will be taught to students. That sounds like mind control to me, Bob. If their science is so strong on the issue of origins, why not let the arguments supporting intelligent design into the classroom where it can be debunked if it can't be defended? You liberals are always accusing us conservatives of censorship. It sounds like your side has picked up the disease on this one.
Ref. https://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20051201/...oscientistsfear

Intelligent Design

Breaking News

Federal judge rules "intelligent design" cannot be included in Pennsylvania public school biology courses.
Ref. CNN

Intelligent Design Sciences Education Art Writing & UFO

Did this have to go to a court? Intelligent design is not science. Biology is.

I can't understand why the unintelligent designers of this theory don't ask for it to be taught in philosophy or theology class where it belongs.