Yet More on Intelligent Design
Intelligent Design
Some subjects suck me into them, I’m not sure why. It’s not like I’m a Great Debater or anything, that I hope to sway others with my logic and charm. Nevertheless there is a handful of subjects that I really feel passionate about, and Science is one of them. If you want an argument, bring up Japan, Multi-Culturalism or Evolution.
I am currently embroiled in a debate on the topic at Dean’s World, and while I like Dean a lot I also disagree with him on this issue.
The crux of my argument against Intelligent Design is that it is not science and has no place in a science curriculum. I actually believe that religion should be discussed and studied in public schools, but not in science class. This is problematic for those who actively seek to reintroduce religion, because the Supreme Court has made it clear in several rulings that teaching religion is not going to happen in the American public school system.
I have problems with the Supreme Court position on many fronts, especially on the issue of the separation of powers. However instead of fighting this issue, people who want religion taught in schools have seized upon a “backdoor” or a “loophole” that allows them to advance their religious views in public schools through the science classroom.
I believe that they have gained traction in exploiting this loophole because evolution and natural selection are difficult concepts to grasp. I didn’t understand the latter until about 10 years ago, and the moment when I finally understand the role chance played in natural selection remains as one of my greatest personal epiphanies.
If evolution were simpler and better understood, would the Discovery Institute advance the teachings of numerology or the Kabala (which has a strong component of numerology built into it as I understand) in Math? How about Astrology in Astronomy?
