Creationism vs Evolution
Intelligent design
First off, the President gets to have an opinion. It shouldn't be a monstrous controversy every time he states it. Of course, since we live in such a contentious time and this particular President has created such an us against them administration, I don't have much sympathy for him. Just for the recod, he's still an idiot.
Intelligent design sounds like a good description of my own personal belief of how the world was created. I believe that God created the universe over a course of billions of years, that he started the process and nudged it along the way. The whole 6 earth days theory is just flat silly in more ways than one. That being said, our current knowledge of exactly how the universe was created is, in my humble opinion, still in it's infancy. We think we know a lot but we don't. I'm sure a lot of people will argue with me but you're wasting your time.
Now, intelligent design is creationism, plain and simple. It says that we were designed by some intelligence. We all know that George wasn't talking about aliens from Zardoz.
So, now that we've got my own personal prejudices laid out on the table, should the concept of intelligent design be taught in school? Should evolution be taught in school and the concept of creationism/intelligent design be left to Sunday school? I guess that depends on what class you're teaching. Creationism has no "science" behind it so it doesn't make sense to teach it in science class. Evolution does have a good bit of science behind it, as limited as it might be in the overall scheme of things. The things we know are science, the things we believe about God are not. The two really have nothing to do with each other, teach one in science class and the other in a theology class. Yes, students need to be exposed to different ideas but not in the same room at the same time.
I don't know why this is so freaking hard. Well, that's not true, it's hard because we have people involved and we all know how fucked up people are.
First off, the President gets to have an opinion. It shouldn't be a monstrous controversy every time he states it. Of course, since we live in such a contentious time and this particular President has created such an us against them administration, I don't have much sympathy for him. Just for the recod, he's still an idiot.
Intelligent design sounds like a good description of my own personal belief of how the world was created. I believe that God created the universe over a course of billions of years, that he started the process and nudged it along the way. The whole 6 earth days theory is just flat silly in more ways than one. That being said, our current knowledge of exactly how the universe was created is, in my humble opinion, still in it's infancy. We think we know a lot but we don't. I'm sure a lot of people will argue with me but you're wasting your time.
Now, intelligent design is creationism, plain and simple. It says that we were designed by some intelligence. We all know that George wasn't talking about aliens from Zardoz.
So, now that we've got my own personal prejudices laid out on the table, should the concept of intelligent design be taught in school? Should evolution be taught in school and the concept of creationism/intelligent design be left to Sunday school? I guess that depends on what class you're teaching. Creationism has no "science" behind it so it doesn't make sense to teach it in science class. Evolution does have a good bit of science behind it, as limited as it might be in the overall scheme of things. The things we know are science, the things we believe about God are not. The two really have nothing to do with each other, teach one in science class and the other in a theology class. Yes, students need to be exposed to different ideas but not in the same room at the same time.
I don't know why this is so freaking hard. Well, that's not true, it's hard because we have people involved and we all know how fucked up people are.
posted by Big Ed at 7:47 AM
2 Comments:
Intelligent design is a dangerous and subversive idea. It is truly anti-science.
The concept as put forth by conservative Christians is a way to shove Christianity down our throats, on that I agree. Teaching it in science class is probably wrong simply because it will taught according to some accepted doctrine. That being said, in it's scientific form, it's no different than a lot of theories floating around that people accept as "science". Stephen Hawkings even talked about it in that book everyone thought was so great.
Is it really all that hard to at least accept as a possiblity? It would seem to me the height of arrogance to assume that we are the top of the food chain. That over billions and billions of years, we're the best that the universe can do. We are just now discovering that we can manipulate genetic material to grow bigger tomatoes, isn't it possible that something was manipulated to produce us? Look at our accomplishments over the last 1000 years and multiply that out another 1000 years. At what point do we figure out how to create a universe and manipulate it into whatever form we choose?
It is asking us to accept that something is beyond our comprehension and always will be
God, whatever that means, will someday be defined in scientific terms. God is simply beyond our comprehension at the present time just like electricity was beyond our comprehension at one time. Maybe the universe has always existed and that there was no point where there was nothing and then there was something. My finite mind tells me that it had to be "created" at some point.
If you throw in the term ‘intelligent design’ then I have to go and try to find the designer, figure out how he got to be intelligent, and who designed the designer.
Yep. Our tiny, finite, limited little intelligence can't handle that. I stop at God, see him as nudging things at certain points and sitting back to watch the show. The rest just crosses my eyes and gives me a headache.
http://www.venganza.org/
ROFL. That's some funny shit.
That web site should be required reading in every government class. I don't think I've ever seen a more concise arugment in support of the seperation of church and state.
Post a Comment
<< Home