Andrea commented on my recent post on Intelligent Design (ID) and asked:
“Do you believe that it is an idea better off ignored, or is it too dangerous of an idea to leave untouched? I can’t help but think that we are feeding into the movement by validating their right to a position in the evolution debate.”
If this were a philosophical debate, I would agree. Just like we don’t argue with white supremacists, we needn’t argue with people that think science should look to the Bible for answers to the questions of biology or cosmology. In a philosophic debate we could easily just write them off as people so clueless as to be ignored.
Unfortunately, this isn’t a philosophical debate, it’s a debate over curricula — what we teach in schools. When the ID folks manipulate their agenda to more closely masquerade as science, we need to take the offensive lest people confuse their philosophy with actual science. We need to soundly crush the notion that you can introduce supernatural beings into science and still call it science.
As an ex-Catholic, it would be like me going into church every day and publicly arguing with the priest that he did not, in fact, turn that piece of bread into the body of Christ. Science has no business introducing itself into the mystical faith of Catholics. Nor do Christians have any right to introduce their faith into science textbooks.
To conclude, I don’t have any problem with people believing in creation as an explanation for matters biological or cosmological. I have a serious problem when they try to introduce it into science curricula.
One thought on “Should We Even Debate Intelligent Design?”
You’re right about curricula being at stake. I’m worried that these warped school boards will continue to allow ID proponents to sit in on meetings. I continue to be amazed at what people will believe and I have to admit, even more impressed with the rhetorical techniques of those who spout out this bs.