»Should Intelligent Design be taught along with Evolution?«
|
|||
 Register first to vote here, I guess. posted by ryder |
|||
|
|||
| in-my-opinion.orgReligion and Mysteries, from worship to werewolvesReligious & Philosophical TopicsShould Intelligent Design be taught along with Evolution? |
|
|||
|
I want you to vote on this, and then read the following: Many of you might have heard about the recent debate in Kansas on introducing Theory of Intelligent Design along with Theory of Evolution in it's science classes. Educators Consider Intelligent Design
Debating a question that the scientific establishment considers settled, Kansas education authorities put evolutionary theory on trial Thursday in a hearing marked by sharp exchanges over Earth's origins and what students should be taught in science class. Scientists who support the idea of intelligent design, a set of assumptions that challenges established scientific thinking, told an approving Kansas State Board of Education subcommittee that modern Darwinian theory relies too much on unproven reasoning. Gaps in the science, they argued, leave open the possibility that a creator, or an unidentified "designing mind," is responsible for earthly development. It would not be far-fetched, said William S. Harris, a Kansas City researcher who favors intelligent design, to conclude that DNA itself is the work of an intelligent being. Students, he said, should be told that. Is it 'just' and 'fair' to include all possibilities, or will it just explode in everyone's face by becoming one way to 'propagate' theism? Remember that these are science classes, and theories on origin/development of life are to be discussed; Intelligent Design IS a theory insofar as it leaves itself open to be proven or disproven, and and appears to be also supported by many scientists. posted by ryder |
|||
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Incidentally, this has provoked a 'reaction', in case you haven't heard of this either: I think we can all agree that it is important for students to hear multiple viewpoints so they can choose for themselves the theory that makes the most sense to them. I am concerned, however, that students will only hear one theory of Intelligent Design.
Let us remember that there are multiple theories of Intelligent Design. I and many others around the world are of the strong belief that the universe was created by a Flying Spaghetti Monster. It is for this reason that I’m writing you today, to formally request that this alternative theory be taught in your schools, along with the other two theories. In fact, I will go so far as to say, if you do not agree to do this, we will be forced to proceed with legal action. I’m sure you see where we are coming from. If the Intelligent Design theory is not based on faith, but instead another scientific theory, as is claimed, then you must also allow our theory to be taught, as it is also based on science, not on faith. You can read the 'open letter' that Mr. Henderson sent the Board at that website, or you may read a concise entry on the essence of Pastafarianism at  A 'pool' of sorts has been started, I'm not sure - $250,000 (yes, money) will be awarded to any person/party that comes forth with a reasonable, logical thesis on why the FSM does not exist. 
posted by ryder |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
 But what our scientist does not realize is that every time he makes a measurement, the Flying Spaghetti Monster is there changing the results with His Noodly Appendage.  nice.
It's scary to me that Christians are trying to get creationism taught in schools. How exactly does one teach creationism? What would the Unit Exam on the creationism chapter of the science book look like? [CLICK HERE TO VIEW THIS PICTURE] posted by Tiefling |
|||
|
|||
|
||||||||
 ryder: A 'pool' of sorts has been started, I'm not sure - $250,000 (yes, money) will be awarded to any person/party that comes forth with a reasonable, logical thesis on why the FSM does not exist FSM = Flying Spaghetti Monster. There are sub-dominations:
Pastafarians
The religion parody of "creation by the flying spaghetti monster" has spread thru the internet like a storm. See Flying Spaghetti Monster ♣ [CLICK HERE TO VIEW THIS PICTURE] posted by knn |
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|||
 ryder: Should Intelligent Design be taught along with Evolution? I voted "Yes", because as I understand the poll question BOTH intelligence + randomity would be taught independentaly. Is that correct? And why should they teach both things. I am a fan of different views. After all I run a discussion board 
posted by knn |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
 Tiefling: It's scary to me that Christians are trying to get creationism taught in schools. How exactly does one teach creationism? of course tiefling would have to be the one to bring those 'wacky christians' into this... where in those cited words above does the word creationism even appear?
is there any scientific way to test the big bang theory? or the theory of black holes? no... and these are taught in schools, yet these take just as much faith as intelligent design, evolution, spaghetti man or any other THEORY... so how can you be bias towards one and not the other? 
posted by The ONEder Man |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
The problem is that there are very many views on the 'nuances' of Intelligent Design - simply look at the various religions and their own views about how it all started, and you'll understand the complications that will arise. Not creationism - that cannot and will not and should not share a room with scientific theory of evolution - but the idea of Some Entity having been responsible for "it all" in the first place is not an idea to merely chuck out saying, "it's all religious". Nevertheless, ONEder, those theories have been derived from natural phenomena that supported their formulation, whereas I think the major basis for Intelligent Design is, "that explains everything and makes us happy." As knn said, all views should be put forth for a student to wisely choose, but the US is a Christian country predominantly, and there are nineteen-to-the-dozen ideas on how Intelligent Design may have manifested itself, so it might still be too complicated to implement it the way they want it - Equal time for both it (what IS it? God, Adam and Eve? Brahma, Vishnu and Siva? Allah?) and Evolution. posted by ryder |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
And just to correct my previous entry: ryder: A 'pool' of sorts has been started, I'm not sure - $250,000 (yes, money) will be awarded to any person/party that comes forth with a reasonable, logical thesis on why the FSM does not exist. I apologise for the poor memory I display at such a young age.. will probably forget my kids' names before Alzheimers.. We are willing to pay any individual *$250,000 if they can produce empirical evidence which proves that Jesus is not the son of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
Challenge Grant Update: We've been flooded with still more donations, and have decided to cap the purse at $1 million -- in part because the number contains a lot of pretty, round zeroes that resemble holy meatballs. But also because many of you offered sums payable in "whisky and wenches," or "ho's 'n' blow," neither of which really count. Thanks all the same. *Prize to be awarded with Intelligently Designed currency; void where prohibited by logic. posted by ryder |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Despite what was posted earlier, their is scientific evidence in support of the big bang theory. The back ground radiation from the initial bang is still radiating throughout the universe to this very day... which is how scientists discovered the age of our universe... As for intelligent design, it is a movement by a small minority of scientists, has not been published, has not been tested, and sounds like an excuse for creationism. People can make up their own minds on what to believe, you don't have to tell them God is still possible, I think the fact that you think you do shows a little to much insecurity in my view. posted by hexediter |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
 I would think it varies depending on the purpose of education. If you feel education is about knowledge, then sure present all the theories and let the kids figure it out for themselves. If you believe education is more about developing reasoning skills, then it may not be the best idea. If you believe both, then you're really in a mess. 
Development of reasoning or decision making skills requires some framework in which to work, right or wrong, the framework must be consistant. For example evolution describes a pattern of change according to certain predictable principals, that we don't know what these principals are, is not important, at least in the context of developing reasoning skills. Situation A + Influence B = Result C. Imagine the chaos if you tried to include all theories in that. Situation A + Influence B = 1) Result C according to evolution 2) (irrespective of Influence B) Result C, since this was predetermined. 3) (irrespective of Situation A) Result C, Since Influence B is divine. 4) Result C (assuming Influence B was intended to affect Situation A) 5) Result C (Since no other result is possible in the grand scheme of things) All at the same time - Whaaa?
A simple exam question such as "How important is Influence B" has conflicting answers, depending on which viewpoint you go for. It would never work. posted by Marl64 |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
hexediter: Despite what was posted earlier, their is scientific evidence in support of the big bang theory. The back ground radiation from the initial bang is still radiating throughout the universe to this very day first off let me point out you don not know where that cosmic radiation is even coming from...it could have been the flying spaghetti monster's giant microwave warming up his meatballs for all you know
now i read an article in  I'd site some of the text but it wants you to buy it  ryder: I think the major basis for Intelligent Design is, "that explains everything and makes us happy." yep and i could say the same for evolution "I think the major basis for evolution is, "chance explains everything and makes us happy"  ryder: (what IS it? God, Adam and Eve? Brahma, Vishnu and Siva? Allah?) and this is still putting it into religous context, why not a being of higher intelligence than a human (i.e. alien) and it doesn't even need the omniscient tag put on it to be an "intelligent designer" posted by The ONEder Man |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
 The ONEder Man: let me point out you don not know where that cosmic radiation is even coming from.. No no.. the fact that the cosmic radiation is not explained away by any phenomenon we see happening opens the possibility of the big bang 'theory'. No science class teacher says that the big bang was how the universe came into being; it is only taught as a plausible explanation, substantiated by the existence of this unexplained phenomenon which would actually be a result of the events in this theory. The ONEder Man: I think the major basis for evolution is, "chance explains everything and makes us happy" So all the overwhelming evidence of slow genetic modification/elimination over time is 'chance' huh.
Anyhow, evolution is no explanation of how things started - it only offers an explanation for how things are what they are now. And it is after all the most widely accepted 'theory'. The ONEder Man: and this is still putting it into religous context, why not a being of higher intellegence than a human (i.e. alien) and it doesn't even need the omniscient tag put on it to be an "intelligent designer" Mmm a being of higher intelligence created the universe where humans and earth-aliens came to be.. and this being is not God by popular definition? Er what is it then? And what is God then? If this 'alien' created 'everything' then did it create God, and then did God create more of this 'alien' or kill it off or...? 
That aside though, think of what they'd teach if they wanted to include intelligent design, if not the religious concepts. "Ok kids so you should understand that Darwin could have been BS-ing us all.. and instead there was this form of intelligence so high that it made the universe and everything in it.. and stuff like that.. now we don't know how this happened - if it 'thought' them into existence.. or if it 'sneezed' or 'made off clay' or whatever.. just that um, something could have made us all ok? Class dismissed." The ONEder Man: the ID scientists are not so much argueing to get ID into schools, but some skepticism about evolution in. Not letting it be taught as fact and show some of the pit falls of the theory That sounds reasonable - after all, evolution is still a Theory, inspite of the vast amount of evidence supporting it. But if you go by this logic then no theory is 'real' and 'accepted' and everything is still uncertain, because we could never really know which theory was true. Huh, that isn't so bad though. Again, it does sound reasonable, but I believe the official 'request' was that ID be given equal time in class as Evolution. posted by ryder |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
ryder: Mmm a being of higher intelligence created the universe where humans and earth-aliens came to be.. and this being is not God by popular definition? Er what is it then? And what is God then? If this 'alien' created 'everything' then did it create God, and then did God create more of this 'alien' or kill it off or...? well you are taking this discussion where it cannot go Evolution pertains to the origins of life on this planet, not the origins of the universe. This is about intelligent design of life. It has nothing to do with ID of everything so stop trying to bring in religous overtones or anything else into the discussion. Hince an alien could have come and made earth his petri dish and viola! life. No need for him to create the universe to do that. That arguement is nonsense. ryder: Anyhow, evolution is no explanation of how things started are you serious? where does the primordial soup come into play then? bleh, i have to go to work now...to be continued posted by The ONEder Man |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Creationists (by which I mean anyone who believes in supernatural phenomena) are too mentally retarded to take common sense and experience combined to conclude that there is absolutely no such thing as supernatural phenomena, that all that shit is fake fake fake, that God was made up by the sore losers of the ancient world, and that no book including Darwin's can possibly encompass the totality of natural phenomena. Therefore I think they should go to a "special" class for "special" kids where they can learn their Holy Book in peace. If this is not possible, then we should not teach science at all...it's not as if there is any great shortage of people with basic science knowledge. I guarantee you, if any teacher ever so much as mentions the words "intelligent design" in a scientific context to my kids should I ever have any, they are going to be homeschooled from that moment on. [CLICK HERE TO VIEW THIS PICTURE] posted by holy_of_holies |
|||
|
|||
1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next
Goto page
1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next
 Register Log in |
The time now is 12 February 2012, 15:52 php B.B. |