Intelligent Design Vs. Evolution

Intelligent Design (ID) is a scientific theory which suggests that natural phenomenon like the formation of the universe, human organ system, and hierarchy in both the plant and animal kingdom is a result of a process that is ultimately guided by some form of intelligent design. It has become the major opponent of Darwins evolution, the scientific theory that everything around us is a result of natural selection and not based on any grandeur plan, which is currently taught in almost all schools of thought. Currently, the academic world is divided on the idea of whether ID should be taught in addition to evolution in science classes in public schools.

Those who criticize ID believe that it is simply a reformulation of Creationism, the belief that a supernatural being fashioned the entire universe which includes man. It is simply a strategic plan to return religious creationism back into the academe which is a direct violation of the U.S. Constitution that clearly states the separation of State and Church. Furthermore, they believe that ID provides pseudo scientific facts. Michael Behe in his article The Challenge of Irreducible Complexity Every living cell contains many ultrasophisticated molecular machines attempted to provide scientific evidences which will link ID to the scientific world. Unfortunately, Michael J. Behe was keen to the details of each of his arguments and was able to refute all of it. When he suggested that the complexity of some biological functions directly points out the impossibility of Darwinian Evolution, he was cleanly and effortlessly refuted by Kenneth Miller. All of his arguments were then reversed in favor of Darwinian Evolution by providing scientific evidences that shows how evolution duplicates and modifies certain organ parts to suit the needs of a species survival. (Miller, The Flaw in the Mousetrap, par. 5). According to them, ID lacks scientific evidences which will characterize it under scientific inquiry. It is simply a philosophical inquiry which rests on theoretical assumptions alone.

On the contrary, ID supporters claim it is a scientific theory and is not motivated by any religious means. There may be certain similarities between the two but ID never claims that a supernatural being is the cause of things. It simply argues that it is based on a grand design and not a mere accidental result. Those who wish to discredit it are the one who have hidden motives for not permitting it to be discussed in the academe.

Any monopoly always results to abuses. Darwinian evolution is not yet a law. It is simply a theory. Laws are distinct from theories because it has been proven and accepted by the scientific community. Theories are a set of arguments which aims to answer a scientific inquiry yet lacks sufficient evidence to support it. Even after reigning supreme for several decades, it has not yet reached the next level.

Introducing ID in the classroom will create balance. It will further create an avenue for the students to practice their scientific reasoning by carefully analyzing and examining the evidences provided by the two school of thought. Teaching and indoctrinating are two different things. By introducing ID in the classroom, we provide them another theory to criticize. We do not discuss it to become an absolute doctrine but an avenue for them to utilize their reasoning skills. We should bear in mind that one aim of education is to foster critical thinking in the minds of the students. A way of achieving this is through argumentation and debate. There can be no debate if there is only one side of the pole.

My central argument is a causal deductive argument. Here are the premises in my argument
P1       Intelligent Design (ID) is a scientific theory which provides the students an alternative theory aside from Darwins Evolution which will allow them to practice scientific inquiry.
P2        ID is in accordance with the US constitution and does not violate the separation church and state rather it is in support of academic freedom.

Conclusion ID should be taught in addition to evolution in science classes in public schools because it further enhances critical thinking.


Post a Comment