Rationality and Science vs. Intelligent Design

Re: Intelligent Design (Cincinnati Enquirer letters from readers, 2/20/05) http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050220/EDIT03/502200312/1023/edit Your many letters supporting teaching "intelligent design" alongside evolution is frightening evidence of people's willingness to teach mythology as science and science as morality. Both are travesties of good education. While there might be minor holes in the complete fossil record, dismissing it for that reason is like arguing that a painting with a small hole it in is no longer a painting and that the important part is the hole (about which it is impossible to know anything.) Such irrational thought is dangerous for the future of our kids' education and our nation’s competitiveness.
  • T. F. Stern
    Comment from: T. F. Stern
    02/26/05 @ 12:44:28 pm

    I have some impressive data on my blog site, way too much to include in a comment section. Intelligent Design is the non-believers way of saying God's Creations.

  • Comment from: Rossputin
    02/26/05 @ 01:13:43 pm

    Now this is a very contentious area and one where I hesistate to tread for fear of losing friends, but I'll try treading lightly: Just a few points: Math is easily used to demonstrate almost anything if you know what to do. Something coming out to "nearly" an integer multiple of something is is not proof of anything as that would likely happen more often than not. When someone says the Lord specified a certain time frame, how does he know that it wasn't a person who specified something and said it was the Lord or more likely something that was specified by an unknown person generations before and then attributed to God by a later writer? I just can't take seriously any argument that the earth has been around for 7,000 years. Bottom line is that I think most discussions revolving around religion are more likely to cause trouble than to bring any benefit. I don't really want to get involved arguing about religion. However I am more than willing to argue that it has no place in a science classroom and that teaching our students things with no basis in science is destructive to their ability to think critically and rationally and their ability to compete in an increasingly technological world.

  • Brad Warbiany
    Comment from: Brad Warbiany
    02/26/05 @ 04:02:56 pm

    Ross, I'm inclined to agree with you. A discussion of Intelligent Design has a place in a philosophy classroom, not a science classroom. I have no problem with public schools teaching arguments for and against the existence of god in a philosophy class, but some things should be left out of science classes. Intelligent design is simply a different form of Creationism.