intelligent design vs evolution
according to today’s cnn report:
…the Kansas Board of Education approved new public school science standards Tuesday that cast doubt on the theory of evolution.
The 6-4 vote was a victory for “intelligent design” advocates who helped draft the standards. Intelligent design holds that the universe is so complex that it must have been created by a higher power.
Critics of the language charged that it was an attempt to inject God and creationism into public schools in violation of the separation of church and state.
something doesn’t sit right. if something is complex, it just means i have to work harder to figure it out. and if i can’t figure the answer out, it doesn’t mean there isn’t any. there are topics i’m not too proud to admit ignorance. and theology is one, so i’m gonna stop that train of thought just right there.
so after all the advances we’re reached, after all of darwin’s hard work to prove the concept of evolution, humanity comes back to this. ah, ashes to ashes, huh?
If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
11 Responses to “intelligent design vs evolution”
November 10th, 2005 at
Hey the new look is great.
As for intelligent design……it’s the cheap way out. If it cannot be understood then God must’ve made it. Not an itelligent arguement in my book (Gospel according to Haddock
) - but it seems a lot of states will be teaching “intelligent design” soon. Then it’s probably only a matter of time before it’s taught in Europe. Sad really.
November 10th, 2005 at
faith will find its way through…perhaps in the form of intelligent design?
November 11th, 2005 at
The incorporation of “God” into that inteliggent design is not sad.It’s actually great that man has finally started to admit that there are limits to his intelligence and or capabilities, that some things are beyond his control and understanding– that indeed something as complex as the universe must be created by some higher power like God. I wouldn’t call it “cheap way out”. But that’s only my opinion.
November 13th, 2005 at
Off topic Ruth, I really like the calendar touch you’ve put on the date. Absolutely nothing like it that I’ve seen.
November 14th, 2005 at
Isn’t Darwin’s Theory of Evolution still a theory?
There are intelligent and well-respected scientists who present evidence of a non-evolutionary explanation to how the world came to be. Why not present their arguments alongside discussions of Darwin? Why not teach both sides and let people decide for themselves?
November 14th, 2005 at
haddock, i think it will take time before europe follows suit, given the more diverse religious backgrounds to consider. i also have the impression that there’s a more distinct separation of state and church in place in europe, plus a larger number of agnostics. but i may could wrong, of course.
husticia, sorry didn’t get your point.
glo, i agree. but for it to be imposed in public schools? what about the non-christian school population?
jet, the date format goes with the travelogue template. actually, nalalakihan ako sa kanya, but i don’t know how to tweak the codes, hehe…
maricar, well accdng to wired news:
yes, am all for choices! except that if we include the christian position, we should also be ready to include other non-christians’. but i don’t think our politicians will be willing to bend that far.
November 14th, 2005 at
haha never mind…my mind works differently
November 15th, 2005 at
I agree that Darwinian evolution is more than hypothesis, but it’s still a theory.
Merriam-Webster definitions:
HYPOTHESIS implies insufficient evidence to provide more than a tentative explanation .
THEORY implies a greater range of evidence and greater likelihood of truth .
Like you, I actually don’t agree with the logic from the first article: “Intelligent design holds that the universe is so complex that it must have been created by a higher power.” I don’t believe that it follows.
But while there is evidence supporting Darwinian evolution, there is also evidence questioning it. What I’d like to see in schools is a presentation of all discussions, not just one side. If other points of view have scientific evidence, I’m all for presenting them as well.
November 15th, 2005 at
ooops, parts of the definitions were lost. Webster gives examples of the two:
HYPOTHESIS implies insufficient evidence to provide more than a tentative explanation (eg., a hypothesis explaining the extinction of the dinosaurs).
THEORY implies a greater range of evidence and greater likelihood of truth (eg., the theory of evolution).
November 15th, 2005 at
I think this whole ID thing is scientifically nonsense!or shall we say another american bullshit?
oh no! not again america!!
November 15th, 2005 at
agreed, maricar. but if i’m not mistaken, i think what they want is to introduce the concept of intelligent design in science classes. imagine our future scientists using intelligent design to explain things they cannot, rather than using the scientific method to find the answers?
my pov is that intelligent design and religion can and must have a place in school, but perhaps in a separate class.
cheH, nah, not entirely nonsense naman. i think intelligent design is just as worthy as science is. it’s just that i don’t think it has a place in a science class.