Intelligent design in school?

[Jaimecbr900]

You just answered your entire question right there. Science works because it innately has an error correcting mechanism. Science is not science if it does not have the possiblity of at some point being proven false. I see so many Christians pointing to the former misinformation of Science as proof not to trust it, when in fact that's the beauty of it. Science actively tries to prove itself wrong to get at a better resolution of truth.

Very good point, but how come part of that "resolution of truth" can't include divine intervention as a possible answer?

Look at it another way, if we include Divine intervention as a cause for something then there would be no true sciences. We could dismiss interactions as God's work. Science is not a religion is does not teach truths, it's a mechanism to understand how the world works. Science class are not there to teach students what's true and what's not, they are there to teach them how to perform science. Like it or not Evolution is the basis of modern biology and must be known if you are too understand how it works. Intelligent Design adds nothing to the curriculum.

Again, a very good point. Divinity is pretty black and white. It wouldn't leave much room for it to evolve itself. Although, if that I.D. being taught can be taught using not only one religious point of view but many. The only common denominator the majority of religions have is a Supreme being.


I don't know. I've got to admit that you've got me to thinking.

Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe Science is Science and I.D. is more Phylosophy. The only thing is that Evolution is taught as part of Science though. So in order to counter balance it, I.D. would have to be taught in a Science curriculum. Hmmmmm....

[AWD OWNZ U]

Very good point, but how come part of that "resolution of truth" can't include divine intervention as a possible answer?

Because it's not a scientific principle, divine intervention is not in the realm of science.

Again, a very good point. Divinity is pretty black and white. It wouldn't leave much room for it to evolve itself. Although, if that I.D. being taught can be taught using not only one religious point of view but many. The only common denominator the majority of religions have is a Supreme being.

It's not really an issue of religion. If they are advancing I.D. as a scientific theory, then it needs to be held to scientific standards. Here's how dictionary.com defines science in this context...

The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.

Now was I.D. arrived at through observation? Can there be an experimental investigation? The answer of course is no. God is simply not a scientifically valid answer for why things happen, regardless of it's truth. I realize that might be hard to accept on it's face, but if you think about it you'll probably see why.

I don't know. I've got to admit that you've got me to thinking.

Good.

Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe Science is Science and I.D. is more Phylosophy. The only thing is that Evolution is taught as part of Science though. So in order to counter balance it, I.D. would have to be taught in a Science curriculum. Hmmmmm....

Evolution is science, arrived at through observation and experimentation. It's been open to scientific debate and passed muster to become accepted. I.D. can make none of those claims.

[Jaimecbr900]

You make very valid points.

Like I said, it's made me re-think my position. I think selfishly I was thinking that what's good for the goose should be good for the gander, but I think you have a valid point.

Although there are lots of scientific variables and equations yet to be able to be solved by conventional means. In other words, couldn't it be asserted that sometimes certain things can also be explained by "divine intervention"?

[AWD OWNZ U]

Although there are lots of scientific variables and equations yet to be able to be solved by conventional means. In other words, couldn't it be asserted that sometimes certain things can also be explained by "divine intervention"?

How would you go about it? When is something dumped from scientifically provable to divine intervention? Let's take the motion of the planets for example. For a while it was believed that the stars were controlled by God (or Gods) and that was that. If we had accepted that and not probed further, we'd have never understand orbital mechanics. Proposing divine intervention does not open up new paths ways, it just discourages you from looking further.

The ID people basically just say life is so complicated, there must be some being that created it. So what if we don't understand something, God did it? You know how horribly that mindset would retard scientific progress. The worse that happens if it was divine intervention is we hit a dead end. If it's not and we write it off we have just closed ourselves off to an entire realm of understanding.

[Jaimecbr900]

The ID people basically just say life is so complicated, there must be some being that created it. So what if we don't understand something, God did it? You know how horribly that mindset would retard scientific progress. The worse that happens if it was divine intervention is we hit a dead end. If it's not and we write it off we have just closed ourselves off to an entire realm of understanding.

Try as I might normally otherwise, I have to agree with 99.9% of your thought process on this subject.

Although, you have to admit that there are things that neither Science nor Nature has been able to logically explain just yet and may never.

I do agree that there should be deep phylosophy classes that stimulate debates like this forum in schools. Heated and passionate, but thought provoking. It would certainly make for a better world.

[AWD OWNZ U]

Try as I might normally otherwise, I have to agree with 99.9% of your thought process on this subject.

Although, you have to admit that there are things that neither Science nor Nature has been able to logically explain just yet and may never.

Oh absolutely, but that doesn't mean we should stop trying.

I do agree that there should be deep phylosophy classes that stimulate debates like this forum in schools. Heated and passionate, but thought provoking. It would certainly make for a better world.

Ya but if our schools turn out intelligent thinking individuals, who will be around to mess up my order at McDonalds?

[Jaimecbr900]

Ya but if our schools turn out intelligent thinking individuals, who will be around to mess up my order at McDonalds?