Sunday, November 12, 2006

The Final Argument to Resolve Evolution vs. Intelligent Design

Evolution vs ID

An essay by Clint Slaughter, M.D.

Here’s how to simply and logically solve the argument for everyone:

It is considered irrefutable scientific fact that microevolution exists, ie: species adapt and overcome environmental changes and pressures by taking advantage of random mutation and genetic drift. This is accepted both by supporters of "Intelligent Design" (ID) and the scientific community and is not up for argument.

The true issue is that proponents of ID say that microevolution is not sufficient to allow for such drastic changes from ape to man, ie: allowing consciousness and self-realization, no longer eating lice off of each other, wearing proper clothing, and not having such tacky, overdone hairdos. ID states that a higher power played his/her hand to make humans as we are: in his/her image. Alternatively, the general scientific community has, through intense data collection, research, observation, extrapolation, estimation, rumination, and other ‘ations, compiled sufficient evidence to support the theory that microevolution and macroevolution not only exist, but are the driving force that allowed humans to evolve from lower order lifeforms.

Both are leaps of faith to an extent; either faith in the scientific method, data collection, facts, and mathematical modeling, or faith in a higher power, a “universal force”, a benevolent, or punishing god. If you can accept the obvious and inarguable difference between the two, the solution becomes simple. The logic and reasoning that supports faith in the scientific method is taught in science class. The lessons of religious texts, spirituality and faith in creation is taught in religion class.

The people who feel that ID should be taught in our public school systems need to recognize one simple fact: Intelligent design is not science. You can argue that biological mechanisms such as the eye or our immune systems are too complicated to have evolved due to mutation and environmental pressures alone, but the fact remains that there is no scientific evidence available to support this. You can also argue that ID is a theory, like evolution, that fills in the "gaps" in the fossil record and should be taught as an "alternative". This is flawed logic in that although it is true that this is a theory, it is purely a religious theory and not a scientific theory in any way, shape or form and cannot be tested by scientific method. Using this logical progression, the concept of intelligent design cannot be considered scientific theory and therefore must be not be taught in our public schools as science.

If you still think that ID and your religion should be preferentially taught to your children in school, you do have plenty of options. Outside of public schools, you can take your child to church where creationism is taught and both you and your clergy can resolve the differences between religion and real science by having discussions with your children. If you teach them to have more faith in religion than science, they will believe in creationism, if they find that they see truth in mathematics, observational data, the laws of physics and scientific method, they wil l believe in evolution. Alternatively, you can home school your child or send them to a private school that teaches these concepts as part of the curriculum. You can also move to a country or found your own country where your religion controls a theocracy or monarchy and pass all the laws your particular religious text tells you to.

Public schools in the United States of America, however, should be unbiased and equally represent all knowledge possible: history, mathematics, social studies, science, language, literature, philosophy, and yes, religion.

America is founded on freedom: freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of thought, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. You can still teach your children about the lessons, history, and spirituality of the Bible, the Koran, the Torah, etc., but this is not what should be taught by one of the most advanced educational system in the world. America has the best schools, the best research, some of the most important and innovative advancements of the 20th century and needs to teach our citizens an unbiased, nondenominational representation of world knowledge.

All hail the Flying Spaghetti Monster and his noodly benevolence.

Labels: , , ,

1 Comments:

Blogger beepbeepitsme said...

Ken Miller - On Apes and Humans
http://beepbeepitsme.blogspot.com/2006/11/ken-miller-on-apes-and-humans.html

6:11 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

web counter
BodenDiscount Codes