Jump to content


Photo

Intelligent Design


  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 buckerss

buckerss

    Theta

  • Christadelphian
  • PipPipPip
  • 424 posts

Posted 14 September 2005 - 08:52 AM

So, good old fashioned creationism seems to be old hat, but it appears that we have a new challenger to Mr Darwins theory of evolution in the form of "Intelligent Design". There seems to have been a lot written in the papers about this recently......I even read an intriguing article in a really obscure paper a few days ago (something like the West Highland times or another obscure Scottish paper). Anyone got any thoughts on the concept?

#2 Guest_Colter_*

Guest_Colter_*
  • Guests

Posted 14 September 2005 - 09:01 AM

So, good old fashioned creationism seems to be old hat, but it appears that  we have a new challenger to Mr Darwins theory of evolution in the form of "Intelligent Design".  There seems to have been a lot written in the papers about this recently......I even read an intriguing article in a really obscure paper a few days ago (something like the West Highland times or another obscure Scottish paper).  Anyone got any thoughts on the concept?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Intelligent design is a welcomed compromise that may go a long way to bridging the gap between strict creationism and "coincidental carbon mating" evolutionists. The concept is much more difficult for the anti religion crowd to disprove.

In the USA Bush has proposed teaching "intelligent design" in public schools.

#3 Esther_*

Esther_*

    Eta

  • Non-Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 147 posts

Posted 14 September 2005 - 09:29 AM

I don't know why so many people are against Bush's proposal that intelligent design be taught in schools. I think it's a good idea b/c it gives students a chance to compare the two and decide for themselves which makes more sense.

On a side note, ever read the book The Case for a Creator? It's an excellent book, but what impresses me the most about it is that it was written by a man who used to be an atheist.

Edited by Esther, 14 September 2005 - 09:30 AM.


#4 Kesaph

Kesaph

    Mu

  • Christadelphian
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,207 posts

Posted 14 September 2005 - 09:31 AM

So, good old fashioned creationism seems to be old hat, but it appears that  we have a new challenger to Mr Darwins theory of evolution in the form of "Intelligent Design".  There seems to have been a lot written in the papers about this recently......I even read an intriguing article in a really obscure paper a few days ago (something like the West Highland times or another obscure Scottish paper).  Anyone got any thoughts on the concept?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Intelligent design is a welcomed compromise that may go a long way to bridging the gap between strict creationism and "coincidental carbon mating" evolutionists. The concept is much more difficult for the anti religion crowd to disprove.

In the USA Bush has proposed teaching "intelligent design" in public schools.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>



There's been a thread or 2 about this very subject on here in the past.
Have a search around this area in particular..

#5 scitsofreaky_*

scitsofreaky_*

    Theta

  • Non-Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 359 posts

Posted 20 November 2005 - 09:37 AM

I don't know why so many people are against Bush's proposal that intelligent design be taught in schools. I think it's a good idea b/c it gives students a chance to compare the two and decide for themselves which makes more sense.

The problem isn't having it taught, the problem is that he thinks it should be taught in science class when it is not science. Behe, one of ID's loudest supporters, had to change the definition of science to argue that ID is science.
The main arguement seems to be that certain systems are so complex they had to be created, this is known as irreducable complexity (IC). Gee wiz, how scientific. A problem with IC being science is that it is not falsifiable because it is from an arguement of a lack of scientific evidence: since we don't have evidence of how the eye evolved, and it is just soo complex(hmm, subjective? I think so), it had to have been created. Basically this arguement boils down to a simple phrase: everything complex has to be created. But this begs the question, isn't God complex? And if so (I see now reason to think otherwise), who created God?

#6 CaptainCutshaw

CaptainCutshaw

    Kappa

  • Christadelphian
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,904 posts

Posted 20 November 2005 - 06:04 PM

There should be religion fairs in school.

They would be a bit like careers fairs.

Any religion that wanted to participate could get a booth in the school hall.

The students could walk around and discuss matters with representatives of all the participating religions.

They could collect handouts, listen to mini presentations, and maybe pick up cool free pens and baseball prayer caps.

I think the Christadelphians could do fairly well in such a situation. Relatively, I think our reasons for believing are fairly solid... more solid than others I have heard. (If I had heard more solid reasons from another religion, I wouldn't be a Christadelphian any more of course. :shades:)




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users