The debate rages again… Did the universe start with a big bang caused by chance or by a creator? And once again, the question is not being posed in academic circles but judicial ones. Which leads me to my first question: why do we allow judges to be the arbiters of academic policy? Shouldn’t teachers and parents decide what is best for children to learn–not some judge hundreds of miles away. And the second question is: how can eight families determine the policy for an entire district. What about the other families in the 35+ million dollar (budget year) [Source] school district. Do you think they agree with the eight or with the rest?
Read about the underlying story here (CNN).
The question being posed here is nothing to do with science. It is all about theology. And the situation isn’t cut in dry in the sense that one answer is “open” and other is “religious.” Both answers to the question have serious philosophical implications. Both solutions imply a certain set of facts…intelligent design supposes that there is a creator. Evolution supposes there is no creator. ID aligns with theism. Evolution aligns with atheism.
When you hear the discussion regarding evolution and ID, remember that both solutions impute a certain belief regarding theology. ID isn’t the only one.
Some scientists are conflicted in this area and maintain varying views regarding science and theology. Some atheists believe ID. Some theists believe evolution. I feel rather strongly that their philosophy is not cohesive. They have an Oprah-like mentality: I will take the things which are easy to believe and combine them to form my philosophy. It is easy, wonderful and doesn’t offend anyone in the mainstream. Of course, on it’s deepest levels it really wouldn’t make much sense.
But the much larger issue of this whole situation is not science but philosophy. Every question regarding the origin of the world is philosophical, not scientific. Science requires that things be observable and repeatable–two things you can never acquire when dealing with something that happened a long time ago.
Brown University professor Kenneth Miller said, “Intelligent design is not a testable theory in any sense and as such it is not accepted by the scientific community.” But I likewise assert that evolution is not a testable theory either.
The answer then is how we look at the information in the world. We are all confronted with the same information (at a root level), and you have a choice as to how you interpret that data. Evolutionists generally presuppose that there is no god and IDers presuppose there is a god. That determines how you evaluate everything else in the world.