Top Hat said:
Evolution or Intelligent Design?
It's a while since we had the last debate.
Anyway the answer is Evolution, I find it shocking that the actually teach ID in some schools in the US
Always the one to be controversial, let me give my opinion on this.
First, let me point out that I am writing as a trained scientist, with a PhD in theoretical physics. Second, I'm writing as a natural cynic, someone who takes nothing at face value. Third, let me reassure you that I am writing objectively, not blinded by my own faith.
Science is strict about terminology. Terms such as fact, model, hypothesis, theory, and law have strict definitions. A hypothesis is a good working model that can be used to explain facts and to predict behaviour. A good hypothesis can predict behaviour consistently. When the hypothesis cannot be broken, it emerges as a theory. After hundreds of years have passed, a reliable theory becomes an established law.
By any measure of the scientific method, evolution remains a hypothesis. It is a good working hypothesis, but facts are forever contradicting it. No respectable scientist can honestly claim that it is yet a reliable theory. In this light, we should be open to considering other models and hypotheses. This is why some in the US and elsewhere have proposed teaching an alternative hypothesis: intelligent design. I agree with them wholeheartedly.
The problem here is that the debate focuses on philosophy and not science. Intelligent design smacks of a higher being, a starting assumption that many authorities refuse to allow. When it really comes down to it, this is what the debate is all about. Should educators be allowed to assume the existence of a supreme being when teaching science? Newton did. Pascal did. Rutherford did. Faraday did. Maxwell did. Why shouldn't we?
I get very frustrated when I hear the popular press ridiculing proponents of intelligent design as trying to take us back to the Dark Ages. Far from it! They realise that evolution cannot explain some basic facts and are honestly seeking other hypotheses to explain reality. This has always been the role of science. Galileo was ridiculed and threatened with his life for proposing a model that he honestly believed to be true; time proved him to be right. The proponents of intelligent design, likewise, are facing ridicule as they try to craft a model that better explains the facts.
MacMyDay is being intellectually honest:
MacMyDay said:
Well, it certainly caused some
controversy.
Fraid I'm an atheist, so evolution. I also enjoy Richard Dawkins books too much to change.
He admits his starting assumption. I wish more people would do that.
I know that most people will disagree with me. All I ask is that we consider the facts and not be influenced by the media.