English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I’ve been trying to find out what the straight dope is on this and I’ve not heard anything that makes a whole lot of sense. Is this a hybridization of mainstream religion and science? How much of each is used to ascertain the validity of its conclusions? And who determines those conclusions? If I didn’t know any better, it sounds like mainstream fundamentalism trying a last ditch attempt at pulling the plug on scientific plausibility by throwing in a bunch of conjecture that has no real place in the area in question. (If you can’t blind them with brilliance, baffle them with BS.) It would be like having a scientist tell you that in reality the world is round and then having someone say “yes, but what is reality”? I’m not an atheist but I do see the necessity in keeping religion and science separate, because putting them together is like oil and water, they don’t mix very well.

2006-06-12 05:45:07 · 15 answers · asked by Augustus-Illuminati 3 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

15 answers

Well, for the universe to exist, there had to always have been someTHING or someONE. The big bang theory says there was always someTHING (two particles crashing into each other and beginning this statistically impossible chain reaction resulting in life). Creation says there was always an intelligent being who actually designed the universe and its contents, including humans. This is more logical actually. after all, the odds of 2 particles crashing and creating life is about as logical as putting a lot of watch parts into a box, shaking it and getting an intact watch out of it. The Bible does not contradict science, it is actually supported by science. The problem is that many misunderstand it.

2006-06-12 05:57:12 · answer #1 · answered by thejunglerose 2 · 1 0

look im all for not allowing religon to enter classrooms, or at least not publicly funded classrooms, and im a christian

"Intelligent design" is not religon.

It is the idea that students would be confronted with certain facts about the universe, and then simply told the theory that a higher being or higher power or SOMETHING, created this as opposed to it happening by pure accident.

It seems to me that it is only critical thinking at work.

Evolution, certainly should be taught, and in teaching evolution, we give students all the tools they need and we present them with evidence and we teach them how the theory works so and show them why we think it is valid.

Why would we not also teach them that hey "look at the order of the universe, look at the patterns that repeat themselves in nature, look at the laws of nature" and then propose the theory that all this organization and repeating of patters did not happen by accident?

We do this with philosophy. We do this all the time in critical thinking classes. We even do it in higher level mathematics.

It seems to me that man's origins, the earth's origins are the fundamental questions that people are asking always. Why would we leave these questions outside of schools?

I'm against giving children the answers to the questions, but I am for letting them see the evidence and hearing the arguements from all sides.

2006-06-12 12:57:20 · answer #2 · answered by whoisgod71 3 · 0 0

Intelligent Design is a concept which is used to explain the origin of the earth by the people who just cannot accept that all life started from a single cell which in turn was synthesised from inorganic material(refer to the Oparin Haldane experiment).Intelligent design is presented as an alternative to natural explanations for evolution. It is not regarded as true science. Do check out Wikipedia on this topic. Hope it clears up your doubt.

2006-06-12 13:01:33 · answer #3 · answered by krishnakalaria 1 · 0 0

Intelligent Design is the scientific way of saying things seem to have worked out TOO perfectly to have occurred by simple chance or by accident. Too many equations had to come together JUST right in order for it to happen and the chances of that occurring are SO slim that it just about HAD to have been created by some sort of "Intelligent Design."

Some believe that intelligent design is God, others aliens, some still believe it happened just by chance.

2006-06-12 12:47:50 · answer #4 · answered by Fire-Dawg 4 · 0 0

But at times the two tend to run together so seamlessly. When you have sciences like biology and philosophy that go so well with theology. At the same time sociology and psychology go well with theology as well. The mixing of the two at times could be the missing link that makes all things in the Bible not only plausible, but almost indisputable.

2006-06-12 12:55:08 · answer #5 · answered by mrsdokter 5 · 0 0

Intelligent design is to know what the results will be like before the project is attempted. Only God knew the end before the begining. Thus, only God created with intelligent design. Man is a designer and not a creator/intelligent designer.

2006-06-12 12:50:12 · answer #6 · answered by Lady Di-USA 4 · 0 0

It's my understanding that ID was invented as a way to reconcile science and religion by searching for scientific evidence for God. It was hijacked, however, by fundamentalist Christians who attempted to use it to undermine the credibility of the scientific establishment.

2006-06-12 12:54:45 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

It's the attempt by fundamentalists to insert creationism into the classroom by placing a question mark where they used to have "God did it".

I'll be happy to allow creationism in the classroom when they can cure one virus by coming up with a vaccine against the virus "kind".

2006-06-12 12:51:19 · answer #8 · answered by Rev. Still Monkeys 6 · 0 0

it was like this: a bunch of creationists got together, and decided that since they couldn't put creationism in public schools anymore, they would take undiscovered parts of evolution, use them as holes, and then say evolution was so complex that there had to be an "intelligent designer" behind it. hence the name/

2006-06-12 12:49:50 · answer #9 · answered by nazgulslayer78 2 · 0 0

Since a judge decided in Dover, PA that it IS religion and not science, I would say you are correct. Don't be so confused, your instincts are right.

2006-06-12 13:01:55 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers