💾 Archived View for clemat.is › saccophore › library › ezines › textfiles › ezines › HATS › hats13.t… captured on 2021-12-03 at 14:04:38.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
__
/ \
/____\
.________/][][][\_______.
\__________ __________/
! / /!/ //!\ \! __!_\ !
/ /_/ // \\ \ \_____
/ __ // /\ \\ \_____ \
/ / / // ____ \\ \____\ \
/_/ /_//_/ \_\\_\______\
T-File_13_____October_1_2005
Intelligent Design: The Science of Bullshit
By Emoticon
_______________________________________________________________________________________
The commencement of the 1982-1983 school year marked, for Louisiana, the first \
year in which so-called "creation-science" would join evolution-science in the public |
school curriculum, as called for in the Louisiana Creationism Act [6]. Public schools |
were, by mandate of state statutes, being used to endorse a specific religion, and it |
wasn't long before this law was ruled unconstitutional. In 1987 the Creationism Act |
was found by the Supreme Court, in Alliguard V. Edwards, to be in violation of the |
First Amendment's Establishment Clause which reads "Congress shall make no law |
respecting an establishment of religion" [7][8]. While it would seem that this ruling, |
based on the unambiguous wording of our founding fathers, was quite definitive, the |
debate over creationism in the classroom has anything but subsided, and has in fact |
taken a new form, 18 years later, and our liberties afforded by the Bill of Rights are |
once again being threatened. <
In the late 1980s, the "intelligent design" movement arose, promoting an |
allegedly secular origin theory contingent upon the idea that the universe is too |
complex to have been formed without intelligent planning. The debatably nonscientific |
science of intelligent design, outlined in the 1989 text book "Of Pandas and People," |
is the study of patterns which substantiate the existence of such a being [5]. Despite |
notable connections to the Christian creationist community (most notably its |
endorsement by many outspoken Christians, such as President Bush (who presently has |
power of appointment to fill two supreme court chairs), and its appearance in the |
mainstream shortly after the 1987 creationism case), intelligent design makes no direct |
reference to a "god" or the book of Genesis. Though intelligent design's proponents' |
claim that their theory is secular, it's introduction into the Dover, Pennsylvania |
curriculum alongside evolution, in October of 2004, brought a lawsuit filed by outraged |
parents, joined by the American Civil Liberties Union, against the school board [4]. |
The federal district court trial began this past Monday (September 27, 2005), and |
whatever the verdict, the case will likely be appealed to the Supreme Court, for a |
decision as important as Aguillard V. Edwards. <
Proponents of alternative origin sciences point out that evolution is only one |
of many theories, which itself has numerous variations. As such, many argue that |
students should be exposed to other possibilities. After all, the scientific community |
has embraced fallacies in the past (such as the notion that the Earth is flat or that |
the Sun revolves around the Earth), and even the popularly accepted theory of evolution |
has taken many forms since its conception. <
Secular theories of evolution can be traced back to Greek atomists around 400 |
BC, who first conjectured that all matter was made up of uncreated atoms, the smallest |
unit of matter, derived from the Greek word atomos which means "that which cannot be |
subdivided." Between 400 and and 300 BC, however, the criticism from two revered minds, |
Plato and Aristotle, significantly marginalized these ideas [1]. 2,200 years later, |
Darwin's theories of evolution were first being published, and facing overwhelming |
objection from the scientific community et al. Today the scientific community largely |
accepts evolutionary science based on Darwin's work, however not without modification |
to the 19th century ideas. <
Certainly, one thing we can learn from the amorphousness of what we call |
"conventional knowledge," is that plasticity of the mind is necessary when dealing with |
science, especially at the rate at which new information comes to light in this day and |
age. On that note, many feel that origin science is incomplete without discussing |
alternatives such as intelligent design. While it is true that any evolutionary |
biologist should be open to other possibilities, this hardly justifies theological, |
pseudo scientific practices in public school. <
Modern scientists follow the scientific method - a process in which one forms |
and tests a hypothesis to investigate a subject. Science is not used as a device to |
prove one's predictions correct. Intelligent design, however, is the search for |
patterns which substantiate the central idea that the universe was created by some |
intelligent being. With this haphazard form of science, there is no possibility for a |
confounding variable - one can simply ignore anything that doesn't coincide with their |
statement. Quite simply intelligent design is not science by today's acceptable |
standards. <
Evolution is the cornerstone of understanding modern biological topics from |
genetics to the proliferation of disease. Subsequently, evolutionary science is also |
key in studying applications as developing treatments and cures for genetic disorders |
and AIDS. Evolution has been accepted for 100 years among the scientific community, |
and few question its scientific validity. While no one can say that the current field |
of evolutionary science is complete or perfect, it is undeniably worthwhile to be |
taught. The same argument cannot be made for intelligent design, which does not |
further our understanding of the world, but merely aggregates proof that the world is |
too complex to have "just happened that way" with no scientific benefit in sight. |
More important than the scientific value, or lack-thereof, of intelligent <
design's academic pursuit is its violation of the very first of line of the very first |
amendment of the Bill of Rights. Although it is calculably secular in its vocabulary, |
that is where the separation between Christianity and intelligent design ceases. |
Prominent proponents of intelligent design are almost all outspoken Christians, |
including William Dembski who wrote in his book Intelligent Design; the Bridge Between |
Science and Theology that "Christ is indispensable to any scientific theory, even if |
its practitioners don't have a clue about him. The pragmatics of a scientific theory |
can, to be sure, be pursued without recourse to Christ. But the conceptual soundness of |
the theory can in the end only be located in Christ [9]." Furthermore, the Seattle, |
Washington-based Discovery Institute is an organization with a staunch history of |
backing a conservative Christian agenda also backs intelligent design with their |
antagonistic and divisive "Teach the Controversy" campaign, which aims to redefine |
modern science around the theory [2]. <
Beyond the Christian individuals and organizations who back intelligent design, |
there is an inherent and undeniable theological quality to intelligent design. Its |
central idea is that the world, the universe, is too complex to have been formed |
without the aid of some kind of intelligence, and the entire study is devoted to |
proving that. Believing that intelligent designer created the universe is itself a |
leap of faith. While faith is fine in a religious context, it makes no sense in a |
scientific one. Quite simply, if we can accept intelligent design as science, it's an |
indistinguishably small step to accept Christian creationism as science. Neither are |
supported by evidence, but are embraced by the human condition. <
Intelligent design has no place in public schools as long as the Constitution |
is worth more than the paper it's written on. The political power of the Christian |
right is being used to manipulate the United States legal system in an attempt to |
bypass past Supreme Court legislation, and it's a sad day in America when we roll over |
and let this kind of disrespect for our freedoms go unchecked - let's hope we can still |
have faith (pun intended) the United States judicial system. |
_______________________________________________________________________________________/
__________/ Works Cited \______________________________________________________________
\
[1] "Atomism." Wikipedia. 25 Sept. 2005. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomism> |
[2] "Discovery Institute." Wikipedia. 25 Sept. 2005. |
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_Institute> |
[3] "Evolutionism." Wikipedia. 25 Sept. 2005. |
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionism> |
[4] Goodstein, Laurie."A web of faith, law and science in evolution suit." |
New York Times. 26 Sept, 2005. |
[5] "Intelligent Design." Wikipedia. 25 Sept. 2005. |
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design> |
[6] Louisiana Revised Statutes. Title 17. Chapter 1. Part 3. Sec 286.4. A. |
[7] United States Supreme Court. Edward Vs. Aguillard. 482 U.S. 578. 1987. |
[8] US Const. Bill of Rights. Amendment 1. |
[9] "William A, Dembski" Wikipedia. 25 Sept. 2005. |
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Dembski> |
_______________________________________________________________________________________/