Why do so many americans believe in Intelligent Design?

  • Thread starter Thread starter aprilfloyd
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Walcot said:
You make it sound like we are like sheep in following a ‘fashionable’ idea - and are not skeptical too!!!
Click to expand...
No, I didn’t mean to do that at all. Some Americans tend to be skeptical about some things in a certain way, while those across the water are skeptical differently.
I’m not sure what you mean about not being philosophical? Science is not philosophical - altho’ I guess people get philosophical about what science finds out!
Click to expand...
Ahhhhh, but the theory of evolution is philosophy; it’s used by science to order certain things as in biology, but the theory of evolution is not science. It is simply an alternative way of explaining how we all got here, which includes some very unscientific aspects (spontaneous generation, violations of scientific laws, etc)
 
aprilfloyd said:
What do you think about Krauss and Nye’s point that teaching of psuedo science will hold back American children in the future as they have to compete with the rest of the world, who will have a better understanding of the natural world.?
Click to expand...
:rotfl:

I do not think that any problems we have with teaching science come from ID or even creationism. In the US, devout materialist evoltionists hold that up as a boogey man to scare people away from criticizing the teaching of materialist evolution. My personal opinion is that either it should not be taught at all; there is no reason to teach it. If it is taught, the arguments both for and against should be taught: it should be taught as a conflict.
 
aprilfloyd said:
What do you think about Krauss and Nye’s point that teaching of psuedo science will hold back American children in the future as they have to compete with the rest of the world, who will have a better understanding of the natural world.?
Click to expand...
:rotfl:

I do not think that any problems we have with teaching science come from ID or even creationism. In the US, devout materialist evoltionists hold that up as a boogey man to scare people away from criticizing the teaching of materialist evolution. My personal opinion is that either it should not be taught at all; there is no reason to teach it. If it is taught, the arguments both for and against should be taught: it should be taught as a conflict.

But really, our problems in some areas with education are much more based on comppletely unrelated aspects of education than the teaching of evolution. Some places teach very well, and the students get an excellent education, as tested; in other places, ummm, not so much.
 
St_Francis said:
:rotfl:

I do not think that any problems we have with teaching science come from ID or even creationism. In the US, devout materialist evoltionists hold that up as a boogey man to scare people away from criticizing the teaching of materialist evolution. My personal opinion is that either it should not be taught at all; there is no reason to teach it. If it is taught, the arguments both for and against should be taught: it should be taught as a conflict.

But really, our problems in some areas with education are much more based on comppletely unrelated aspects of education than the teaching of evolution. Some places teach very well, and the students get an excellent education, as tested; in other places, ummm, not so much.
Click to expand...
Are you saying evolution should not be taught
 
St_Francis said:
:rotfl:

I do not think that any problems we have with teaching science come from ID or even creationism. In the US, devout materialist evoltionists hold that up as a boogey man to scare people away from criticizing the teaching of materialist evolution. My personal opinion is that either it should not be taught at all; there is no reason to teach it. If it is taught, the arguments both for and against should be taught: it should be taught as a conflict.

But really, our problems in some areas with education are much more based on comppletely unrelated aspects of education than the teaching of evolution. Some places teach very well, and the students get an excellent education, as tested; in other places, ummm, not so much.
Click to expand...
Where should it be taught as a conflict? In a science class or a philosophy class or a theology class? I don’t think it should be taught as a conflict in a science class, because belief in ID is not and cannot be considered science. It is based on faith in a Creator, and faith is not within the domain of science to verify or falsify.
 
aprilfloyd said:
No just being silly - like you. Of course it was designed as opposed to evolved.
Click to expand...
Great - so we agree that design exists and is done by intelligence.

So what is your issue with those who scientifically search for it? Do you agree with SETI? How do they go about it?
 
meltzerboy said:
Where should it be taught as a conflict? In a science class or a philosophy class or a theology class? I don’t think it should be taught as a conflict in a science class, because belief in ID is not and cannot be considered science. It is based on faith in a Creator, and faith is not within the domain of science to verify or falsify.
Click to expand...
Not true - ID the science, is a scientific search for design. It does not address the author.
 
Charles Darwin himself admitted he could not find evidence–many of the “founders” of what it is considered modern science created/made up evidence, because they themselves could not find any?
 
meltzerboy said:
And faith in G-d IS observable, testable, and predictable according to the scientific method? This sounds topsy turvy to me and demeans both faith and science.
Click to expand...
No. God does not submit Himself to a lab table inspection. He shows Himself experiencially though. By reason we can also find Him.

Bottom line -

A Choice between these two:
  1. god of BUC (blind unguided chance) loveless with no hope or personal relationship
  2. God of Christianity - love itself, hope and a personal relationship.
I pick 2.
 
Evolution is a religion, take it or leave it as that. You don’t have to believe in creationism to not believe that evolution is true.
 
aprilfloyd said:
Are you saying evolution should not be taught
Click to expand...
Right, at least not as science in our k-12 schools.
meltzerboy said:
Where should it be taught as a conflict? In a science class or a philosophy class or a theology class? I don’t think it should be taught as a conflict in a science class, because belief in ID is not and cannot be considered science. It is based on faith in a Creator, and faith is not within the domain of science to verify or falsify.
Click to expand...
I would suggest theolgy but philosophy, or even an interdepartmental course.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top