Intelligent Design

[zsdersw]

Should ID be taught in science/biology classes? If so, should it merely be mentioned as an alternative to the theory of evolution or should it be taught and fleshed-out completely?

I'm of the belief that no, it doesn't belong in science/biology classes, but if it were just mentioned as an alternative to the theory of evolution I wouldn't have a problem with it.

Poll is public

 

[DesiPower]

There's a thin line between ID and God. It will definitely be interpreted as God and loons will start crying foul. But IMO, sure, I am a big supporter of ID and strongly feel that its time all option should be laid down on the table and let the students decide that they believe in, its time to start the debate

 

[Jaskalas]

No real detail, no explanation. A one line opener into a chapter (or book?) of evolution. Mentioned in passing merely for the merit of its historical context. "While religions say blah".

 

[StageLeft]

I think it should be explored, particularly in light of the big bang. The big bang IMO is impossible based on real scientific tenets (cause and effect) anyway, at least if you keep going back to "what came before the big bang". I still don't know how it's possible that we all have come into existence without something either starting the universe out of the blue or the universe always having been here, neither of which follow the laws of science.

 

[Jaskalas]

There's a thin line between ID and God. It will definitely be interpreted as God and loons will start crying foul. But IMO, sure, I am a big supporter of ID and strongly feel that its time all option should be laid down on the table and let the students decide that they believe in, its time to start the debate

Why? At one time we thought the earth was flat, now there's evidence to the contrary. Is it time to start the debate?

If they wish to learn religion, they are perfectly free to do so at a Church. Which I might suggest is separate from a classroom.

 

[zsdersw]

There's a thin line between ID and God. It will definitely be interpreted as God and loons will start crying foul. But IMO, sure, I am a big supporter of ID and strongly feel that its time all option should be laid down on the table and let the students decide that they believe in, its time to start the debate

Are science classes the right place for it, though, when the root of ID cannot be subjected to the scientific method?

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Please define intelligent design.

 

[Borealis7]

No, as its not science. period.

the base case which ID relies on, that Amoeba that "cant live without any one of its parts" has long been disproved. there is no credible evidence to ID, and it doesn't give an answer to anything.

 

[zsdersw]

Please define intelligent design.

The belief that given the observed complexity and intricate interdependency structures of life, an intelligent entity must have conceived and created it.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I went with the last option since its a science class but I wouldn't have a cow if it was brought up in class by a questioning student. You can't close your ears and pretend you didn't hear it.

 

[ModestGamer]

Should ID be taught in science/biology classes? If so, should it merely be mentioned as an alternative to the theory of evolution or should it be taught and fleshed-out completely?

I'm of the belief that no, it doesn't belong in science/biology classes, but if it were just mentioned as an alternative to the theory of evolution I wouldn't have a problem with it.

Poll is public

ID is a philosophy, it is not a science. the premise fials by creating a conclusion and manipulating data to make the conclusion work. Science is collecting data and making reasonable assements of what the data states.

 

[zsdersw]

ID is a philosophy, it is not a science. the premise fials by creating a conclusion and manipulating data to make the conclusion work. Science is collecting data and making reasonable assements of what the data states.

I agree.

 

[BurnItDwn]

Intelligent Design = a religious belief. It has NO place being taught in schools. If it is mentioned in schools, it had better be in a mythology class.

 

[BeauJangles]

I think it should be explored, particularly in light of the big bang. The big bang IMO is impossible based on real scientific tenets (cause and effect) anyway, at least if you keep going back to "what came before the big bang". I still don't know how it's possible that we all have come into existence without something either starting the universe out of the blue or the universe always having been here, neither of which follow the laws of science.

First, you have a terrible misunderstanding of the Big Bang and how it happened.

Second, how does injecting a supernatural deity into the equation make things simpler?

So a deity answers the question of how the singularity got there, but doesn't that simply raise the question of what created the deity or how it got there (even though "there" can't really be defined as a place)?

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

The belief that given the observed complexity and intricate interdependency structures of life, an intelligent entity must have conceived and created it.

Based on that definition, I believe that intro science/biology should teach that science in no way proves/disproves whether or not an intelligent designer exists. This is fundamental.

 

[Jaskalas]

The belief that given the observed complexity and intricate interdependency structures of life, an intelligent entity must have conceived and created it.

...

Well now you've left me stumped. I thought you were referring to creationism. You know, 6 days, 6 thousand years ago... Adam, Eve riding dinosaurs etc. For what else is there on the subject of ID?

I don't think religions have had the smarts to adapt the theory to exist with evolution. Have they?

As for whether the universe has a creator... since science cannot have a say in the matter, what does it have to do with science? The whole notion is out of place. Is irrelevant. It's philosophy, not science.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

I don't think religions have had the smarts to adapt the theory to exist with evolution. Have they?

Theistic Evolution.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution

 

[zsdersw]

Based on that definition, I believe that intro science/biology should teach that science in no way proves/disproves whether or not an intelligent designer exists. This is fundamental.

Wikipedia says this is what ID is:

"certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection."

 

[Jaskalas]

What would scientifically be taught anyway? Since this isn't regarding the book of Genesis you do not have any material to work with. :hmm:

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Based on that definition, I believe that intro science/biology should teach that science in no way proves/disproves whether or not an intelligent designer exists. This is fundamental.

I would have no problem with that.

 

[DaveSimmons]

I can see teaching why Creationism and ID are not science, but also why evolution does not conflict with belief in some kind of creator like the FSM.

But I'm an agnostic, so what do I know?

 

[BoberFett]

Intelligent Design is Science Fiction, not Science.

I wouldn't be at all shocked if we learned someday that planets throughout the galaxy were seeded by some other race hundreds of millions of years ago. But that's best left to the imagination and not a science class.

 

[Fear No Evil]

Intelligent Design = a religious belief. It has NO place being taught in schools. If it is mentioned in schools, it had better be in a mythology class.

Right, when teaching you absolutely DO NOT want to present both sides of thought. That is just good critical thinking when you completely eliminate the 'thinking' of 1/2 of the argument. Hopefully we can parlay this into not teaching about the Tea Party, Republicans, Conservatives, or anyone else you disagree with.

Bigotry! Its OK when its taught in schools!

 

[woolfe9999]

404 science not found.

The religion class is thataway ---> (private school only please)

- wolf

 

[DesiPower]

Why? At one time we thought the earth was flat, now there's evidence to the contrary. Is it time to start the debate?

If they wish to learn religion, they are perfectly free to do so at a Church. Which I might suggest is separate from a classroom.

It does not have to be religious, we dont have to say that "God" created us, but some intelligent being created us, like maybe aliens. For some kind of scientific experiment for all we know. There is no reason to rule that out fully. I am not saying that we teach that some being said - let there be light and... but instead explore the possibilites. Explore why we are so mcuh different from other animals on the planet, why is it that we are the only ones that eveolved so much more than the others.

From where I stand, ruling out this possibility would be like saying that the earth is flat.