Wednesday, December 21, 2005
Design and Evolution
The really interesting part is why it matters so deeply to the advocates of both positions. The cynical part of me answers that it's about getting attention for the advocate rather than the issue. Does it matter to you? It doesn't matter to me whether the world is a random occurrence or there is a guiding intellect. On a moment-to-moment basis, I do the best I can with the information I have at the time. If I had to explain all the information rationally, I couldn't; if I had to express it all as a product of unseen guidance, I couldn't. It's mostly a mish-mash of all types of experiencing/thinking/believing I have at my disposal.
So why does it arouse so much passion and energy? Is "not knowing" such a horrible place for people to live? As a coach, I always get really excited when a client says, "I don't know.." because it means there's a new place to go, uncharted territory to explore together. Join hands, enemies, and go forward together!
Technorati tags: intelligent design evolution reconciliation
There is a great difference between random occurence and guiding intellect. The bigger picture is the struggle for the preservation of logic and the scientific method versus religious dogma. The religious fundamentalists want political control. The control starts with the classroom and the textbooks.
The question is also, does religious ideas, belong taught as fact, in a science room. Is religion mixed in your science class what you desire?
After evolution what next? Psychology, anthroplogy, life coaching?
Nobody need a life coach more than me.
I completely agree that scientific theories like evolution should be taught in science class, and religious ideas like ID should be taught in religious studies. Both are interesting and valuable. Maybe the confusion comes because they are using the same things to back up their theories (the eye, for instance)?
This bit of humour was brought to you in a spirit of good humour. Regards, and Happy New Year.