In my view, the mere existence of a debate on intelligent design and evolution is indicative that these are cultural and social dark times for the United States.
A few nights ago, a friend and I were having dinner in Koreatown here in Los Angeles and the conversation drifted to the intelligent design controversy. This friend is not as – how shall I put it – frustrated as I am about the Pennsylvania trial now unfolding in Dover. In other words, I am more passionate about it than nearly everyone else in my circle of friends. Invariably, they give me these sweetly amused looks as I launch into these discussions; I confess I get considerably agitated when I mull over the lunacy of the argument. The whole thing is idiotic.
But what came up that dinner is that another acquaintance of ours, a beautiful, bright, kind young woman, does not believe in evolution. Shocked by the realization that I actually know someone who plainly denies evolution, I immediately asked: “what do you mean she doesn’t believe in evolution?” She doesn’t, as simple as that. As if evolution were something to be believed in, as if we were talking here about the afterlife, ghosts or different forms of life in other planets. That is, conjectures, or even fantasies - even though some of us would love them to be real, to be factual. Evolution, on the other hand, is reaffirmed almost everyday through scientific proofs of all kinds, big and small.
In any case, this beautiful, bright and kind acquaintance got a major boost this week: the Kansas School Board approved a curriculum that includes concepts other than natural explanations on the origin of life. In science classes. Not philosophy, not religion, not politics – science. The board voted 6-4; and those who supported the decision are fairly open about their religious beliefs, saying that evolution is actually offensive to Christianity.
Sadly, Kansas is not alone – states like Ohio and West Virginia have also adopted the teaching of intelligent design in science classes.
The Pennsylvania trial is of special interest because the Dover board was the first in the United States to order the teaching of intelligent design. Pennsylvania is also Michael Behe’s backyard. Behe, a biochemist and Lehigh University professor, was one of the trial’s main witnesses for intelligent design. It is interesting to note that he once supported evolution to the core; according to him, over time he came across evidence that there are biochemical systems that are “irreducibly complex” and therefore must have been created by an intelligent designer.
Let’s examine this last part – an irreducibly complex system? I see; whenever we don’t really understand something, we should just pin it down on the Lord. Must be nice. I mean, how comforting. And please note the verb choice - to create. Out of nothing.
Behe and other pro-intelligent design scientists are sponsored in big part by the Discovery Institute (he is a senior fellow with the institute, of course). No news here, I suppose. I have already made my distaste for the Discovery Institute known here in the blog. So now I am doing it again.
The good news for us "heretics" is that all the members currently on the Dover, PA board were defeated by opponents who are evolutionists. That is really wonderful news, and it gives me hope that the intelligent design movement will eventually lose its force. It also shows that even though only 11 parents are suing the Dover board for its inclusion of intelligent design in the science curriculum, there are many more supporting them outside the courtroom.
All this, however, means absolutely nothing to clowns such as Pat Robertson. The man, who back in the late nineties issued a similar warning to Florida residents when they allowed homosexual organizations to display the rainbow flag, redirected his wrath against Dover this time. Accusing them of voting god out by not reelecting the pro-intelligent design school board, he added: “if there’s a disaster in your area, don’t turn to God.”
See what I mean when I say dark times?
November 11, 2005
IGNORANCE MUST BE BLISS
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Hi Gisela,
I am interested in your thoughts on the Intelligent Design debate. What gets me is the how reactionary people are on both sides of this argument. Even defensive. While I am no scientist, I do see flaws on both sides of the debate and I also see flaws in peoples logic. It's become way too emotional, and yes I mean for many on the side of evolution too. I am not accusing, it's just something that's been on my mind since I read The Metaphysics of Evolution (http://www.lewrockwell.com/reed/reed59.html)
In my opinion, I the jury is still out on this debate and I would hate to see scientists throw out objectivity in an effort to rush to the defense of evolution.
Just some thoughts of mine. I enjoy discussing these sorts of things with people who will challenge me.
Tim
Thanks for your comment and sorry it took me some time to get back to you.
Frankly, I disagree. In my opinion, the concept of evolution has been more than reaffirmed through time. As opposed to intelligent design; try asking an intelligent design supporter for some sort of verifiable data, and nothing of the sort will be given to you.
It is a crazy discussion, based on nothing. In a way, intelligent design arguments remind me of the ones deniers of the Holocaust use - are you familiar with their techniques?
More than anything, this debate for me has great importance in the sense that intelligent design is by its own nature religious. The mere concept that a "higher being" would be responsible for the master plan of this world is religious, no matter how you look at it. And that, I am positive, has absolutely no place in the public system. Or better yet, no place in Science class - teach them in history class, in social studies, whatever.
See, like you I am no scientist - my interest here is in what ID signals.
As for scientists rushing to defend evolution - I don't actually see a lot of that happening. I see them laughing at Intelligent Design, and rightly so. It's the parents of those children who are subject to the ignorance of small town school boards who are defending evolution; and again, rightly so.
Don't you think religion is utterly private? If parents want their kids to learn about the world through the bible, they can always send them to private religious schools.
As for the emotional aspect of it - that's all relative. Some people get emotional over baseball games, which in my opinion are serious candidates for the most boring sports events on earth...Go figure.
Post a Comment