Intelligent Design (What should be taught in schools?)

by dhw, Friday, February 01, 2008, 08:25 (6139 days ago) @ a retired teacher

You're absolutely right, and I've already been criticized in exactly the manner you've described. The "concept" of intelligent design goes back centuries, and it's as good a way as any to describe the alternative to chance. Darwin himself used it in a letter (23 May 1861). But in recent years it's been hi-jacked to promote Christianity, which is why I say it's been given an "undeserved shade of religious fundamentalism". The concept in its original sense leads to a wide range of possible scenarios, which I've tried to cover in my various speculations on the nature of a designer. However, since the term has been corrupted, my statement that ID is "the basis of the case against atheism" is a sloppy piece of writing (and thinking). I'll rephrase it during the next revision to show that I mean "disbelief in chance". - We still have to be careful, though. The fact that the new concept of ID has been dismissed as "pseudoscience" should not be an excuse to dismiss all its arguments. There are still fundamental gaps in our knowledge which science can't fill. The new, "corrupted" ID offers just one way of filling them, but who is to say that the Christian way is any more or any less likely than all the others (including chance)? It comes down to individual beliefs or, in the case of an agnostic, disbeliefs. - As for a neutral term to replace "designer", a competition is a great idea. Not so sure about the cash prize, though, unless you're offering...?