Is it really that bad if intelligent design is taught in school, I mean really, is it?

Question

Disclaimer: I'm an agnostic and an evolutionist.


If my son gets taught intelligent design in school I'm going to tell him son thats a theory its like the geocentric solar system people used to believe it but they don't anymore.

Your job as a student is to play the game and learn the theories and get As on test, but the space between your ears is your own.

RAmen

Answer 1

If schools taught 'how to think', you might be right, but they don't. They simply teach 'what to believe'. That being the case, it hardly seems wise to teach bronze age ideas to our kids, unless we are planning on bringing back the bronze age.

Answer 2

You're too cavalier about the likelihood that crackpot theories will leave a residue with too many minds, instead of passing through their ears just long enough to be regurgitated for a test.

I think so-called Intelligent Design can be taught as a political controversy in Government Class. As a religious theory in Comparative Religion, but it does not belong is Science Class! Science is based on demonstrable observations, on valid scientific method, on perr-reviewed research, but Intelligent Despign has none of this. To include it in Science Class would pervert science. Next we'd be giving Astrology equal time with Astronomy, or the Flat Earth theory equal time with the reality that the Earth is round.

If some people have a hard time adjusting to reality because of their religious obsessions, we should not need to accommodate them.

Would they give ME equal time in their Sunday Schools to present MY "Jesus Never Existed" theory?

Answer 3

So long as they also teach the theory that the lack of pirates is the cause of global warming.

Or that gravity is due to an intelligent being pushing people down toward the earth.





of course, those things are nonsense as they are humorous examples of pseudoscientific or nonscientific thinking.

but, if someone opens the floodgates to other pseudoscience (aka intelligent design) then it is nothing but hypocrisy (and a violation of the 1st amendment) to allow SOME pseudoscience into schools, but exclude others... and to let the line between these be drawn by the dominant religious dogma.

Answer 4

Yeah it is. The problem with the word "Theory" is that lay people and scientists have a completely different definition of the word, scientists having the correct definition by the way.

To a scientist, "theory" means: Everything we can observe and predict indicate that this idea is the MOST accurate, however, we cannot recreate it, therefore, it can't be a "Law".

To a lay person, theory means: Idea. This is what a "hypothesis" is to a scientist. In otherwords, lay people have no idea what the word means and have been using it incorrectly for decades. Therefore, "the theory of intellegent design" really just means, "an possible way that the world came to be, but there really is no way to use this idea in science, and we can't use it to predict how things may turn out, therefore it's really just rubbish. In fact, it's kind of like a fairy tale it's just missing some Unicorns."


BTW, you wouldn't be reading and responding to this via this medium if there wasn't something to the scientifc method. The scientific method is responsible for vaccines, eradicating polio, nuclear energy/bombs, flight, modern construction, space travel, and virturally everything else in our modern world. If we relied on fairy tales, we'd still be in the dark ages dying at the ripe old age of 33.

Answer 5

Separation of church and state!!! How the heck would teachers decide which intelligent design theory to present? Seems far to open to advocating one religion over another. A moment of silence, hey, that's cool. Putting religion in school, not.

I'm an agnostic, too. I understand your point but too much of this country already is mixing a fundamentalist Christian view into legislation. I'd hate to see more of that encouraged.

Answer 6

In a public grade school or high school....NO. Intelligent Design (i.e. creationism) isn't an alternative scientific theory, it is a story from christian mythology with no basis in any type of scientific fact or theory. Now on a college campus, teach Creationism as an elective under the heading of philosophy, or religious studies....fine.

Answer 7

No. "Intelligent Design" is just another way of saying "the Christian's version of things". With a few minor variations on certain details, there is only one basic version of natural creation that is agreed upon by the international scientific community. But there are literally thousands of different interpretations of God's plan, each based on a different religion. Are you going to teach each and every version of religion in school? No, that would be impossible, and as such it is unfair to single out any of Christianity's versions of creation to be taught in school over other versions.

Bottom line -- religion is supposed to be taught in church, not in school. So go on and pick a church and indulge yourself in whatever interpretation of God's plan suits you, but don't try to force your religious views on children who's public education is being paid for by public taxes.

Answer 8

Right on. When you call it "playing the game" you put it in exactly the right frame.

ALL of education seems to be parroting back to your instructor. It's not always belief systems but there will be a model of thinking that is propounded to be sure.

I think that in the future they will be pointing at us and laughing at what we are teaching in our schools. While we may feel smug and superior looking at the folly of prior generations (mccarthy witch hunt, salem witch hunt, the universe revolves around earth) for what they used to teach due to moral and religious reasons, I think that teaching 'intelligent design' in our schools today, forced by a power group but denied by almost every scientist is folly at best.

Answer 9

I don't think it's bad if it's taught as you suggest, as a theory broadly discredited by the scientific community and generally only supported on the basis of faith. It's when it's taught as a viable alternative to or alongside evolution when it becomes questionable.

I agree we should be teaching students to think critically and provide them with all the facts rather than hold anything back, but we should be careful as to how these facts are presented.

Answer 10

I believe that intelligent design should be included in a 'comparative religion' class in school. Something along the lines of "We don't know all the answers, but here are some leading theories." Atheism and agnosticism should be included as well as the major faiths.