close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Welcome to Glock Talk

Why should YOU join our Glock forum?

  • Converse with other Glock Enthusiasts
  • Learn about the latest hunting products
  • Becoming a member is FREE and EASY

If you consider yourself a beginner or an avid shooter, the Glock Talk community is your place to discuss self defense, concealed carry, reloading, target shooting, and all things Glock.

How could intelligent design be taught in public schools?

Discussion in 'Religious Issues' started by Gunhaver, Jun 28, 2012.

  1. Gunhaver

    Gunhaver the wrong hands

    2,736
    0
    Jan 24, 2012
    For all the people that advocate this I'm curious how you would have it done. Seems to me like saying at the beginning of every school year, "Some people think that god did it" would pretty much cover the entire point. What else is there to teach?

    As far as equal time goes, there's so much more to cover in actual science that the ID portion wouldn't have enough material to fill that time. Is there any logical way to do this?
     
  2. WS6

    WS6

    2,972
    77
    Jan 27, 2007
    Teach it as a philosophy course with these as its texts:

    http://josephkenny.joyeurs.com/CDtexts/ContraGentiles1.htm
    http://josephkenny.joyeurs.com/CDtexts/ContraGentiles2.htm
     


  3. Gunhaver

    Gunhaver the wrong hands

    2,736
    0
    Jan 24, 2012
    I was referring to those that wanted it taught as science right alongside evolution. It obviously is philosophy but that's not good enough for some.

    For instance, do we teach irreducible complexity and then teach the flaws in that argument or do we leave scientific rebuttals out which isn't really fair, but it isn't actual fairness they're after anyway.
     
  4. Bren

    Bren NRA Life Member

    42,038
    8,867
    Jan 16, 2005
    Kentucky
    Not familiar with your references, but teaching it as philosophy does seem most appropriate. On the other hand, ID is a recent invention that is intended to introduce religious beliefs as part of a science curriculum, to avoid or diminish the teaching of science that conflicts with religion.

    I think Gunhaver's point is that the only purpose of ID is to teach that it is science, so there wouldn't be much point, from the ID side, in teaching it as philosophy. I'm not enough of an expert on philosophy to say whether it really qualifies in that regard.
     
  5. Norske

    Norske Millennium Member

    3,454
    0
    Mar 24, 1999
    Step 1:

    Prove that there was in fact an "Intelligent Designer".

    Until Step 1 has been accomplished, do not attempt to proceed to Step 2.
     
    Last edited: Jun 28, 2012
  6. Tilley

    Tilley Man of Steel

    1,750
    2
    Mar 21, 2006
    USA
    <----------------------able to leap tall buildings in a single bound.
     
  7. steveksux

    steveksux Massive Member

    19,599
    1,923
    Jul 12, 2007
    Yes, you should teach the controversy.
    NOOOOOOO!!!!! Not THAT controversy!!! :supergrin:

    It's the 21st century version of the old saying. Everyone else's religion is superstition. My religion is "science". :rofl:

    Randy
     
    Last edited: Jun 29, 2012
  8. Bren

    Bren NRA Life Member

    42,038
    8,867
    Jan 16, 2005
    Kentucky
    Science doesn't demand absolute proof - it generally says there are no absolutes.

    But it demands that the theory be an actual "theory" based on evidence. Intelligent design is not that - it is a leap of faith, based on speculation about a lack of evidence.
     
    Last edited: Jun 29, 2012
  9. Norske

    Norske Millennium Member

    3,454
    0
    Mar 24, 1999
    Those who demand the teaching of "intelligent design" do so from a faith-based assumption that a supernatural being actually designed the universe. :dunno:

    But, the existence of "God" is and will remain just that; a faith-based assumption, until such time as "God" unmistakeably proves his, her, or it's actual existence in some unmistakeable fashion.

    Until we can all be sure there was a designER, it is pointless to teach "Intelligent Design" to minds full of mush.
     
  10. G23Gen4TX

    G23Gen4TX

    2,240
    18
    Nov 9, 2010
  11. Roering

    Roering Sorting nuts

    5,235
    147
    Feb 14, 2008
    Costa Mesa
  12. Big Bang - true or false?
    If true then - Big Bang = quantum physics event
    What is needed for a quantum physics event to occur?
     
  13. juggy4711

    juggy4711 Nimrod Son

    3,060
    0
    Sep 20, 2006
    Galveston County, TX
    The probability that such event will occur.
     
  14. Woofie

    Woofie Disirregardless CLM

    9,991
    20
    Apr 10, 2007
    Here
    If the possibility exists for a quantum event to occur then it will both occur/not occur.
     
  15. Gunhaver

    Gunhaver the wrong hands

    2,736
    0
    Jan 24, 2012
    So none of the ID folks here have any clue for a curriculum for it? I think that may be your problem.
     
  16. Woofie

    Woofie Disirregardless CLM

    9,991
    20
    Apr 10, 2007
    Here
    More accurately stated.
     
  17. Cavalry Doc

    Cavalry Doc MAJ (USA Ret.)

    34,969
    9
    Feb 22, 2005
    Republic of Texas
    ID does not need to be taught in schools, it just needs to be acknowledged. The theories are out there.

    The approach should be simple. This is a school. We are here to show you what mankind currently knows. Mankind has a need to know, and occasionally, due to that, people jump to conclusions out of that need. Whether or not a deity or deities created the universe and/or life on this planet is an unknown. There is no evidence that science has found that proves it one way or the other. The theory of evolution and the big bang theory do not prove whether or not deity involvement is present or not. But still, many people have chosen to believe one way or the other. Children are perceptive, and if asked, they would probably be fairly accurate in picking out the theists and atheists among their teacher. Schools are part of the government, and therefore are not supposed to assist in the establishment of any religious beliefs one way or the other. Some people feel one way about the subject, and some disagree with them. It is controversial, and it not a subject appropriate to be discussed in school. This is a subject that you really need to discuss with your parents, and those that that you respect outside of school, and is one of many decisions you will have to make without the school guiding you. Bottom line, it is. It may have been made, it may have been designed, and it may have all happened without any conscious involvement. It's your choice to believe one way or the other, or not believe either way.
     
  18. Cavalry Doc

    Cavalry Doc MAJ (USA Ret.)

    34,969
    9
    Feb 22, 2005
    Republic of Texas
    But there is no proof either way. BBT and Evolution and intelligent design are not mutually exclusive theories.

    Neither atheism or theism should be encouraged.
     
  19. Cavalry Doc

    Cavalry Doc MAJ (USA Ret.)

    34,969
    9
    Feb 22, 2005
    Republic of Texas
    The more you know, the more you realize what you don't know.

    Wouldn't it be enlightening to admit we don't know..... Or should we just pick sides and go with that one because it fits within our comfort level?
     
    Last edited: Jul 5, 2012
  20. Animal Mother

    Animal Mother Not Enough Gun

    13,365
    252
    Mar 22, 2004
    Mutually exclusive? Not necessarily, but only the first two have any evidence showing them to be valid.
    No, science should be encouraged in the teaching of science, which requires the exclusion of ID, just like all the other baseless faith based pseudo-scientific topics.