Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Intelligent Design in Science Class - Sample curriculum please
carini
Inactive Member


Message 46 of 108 (298343)
03-26-2006 2:55 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Jman
01-08-2006 3:33 PM


ID as part of creationism should be taught in history class along with any other major religious world view, not in science class. Its not a science and has no basis in any scientific view of the world.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Jman, posted 01-08-2006 3:33 PM Jman has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by inkorrekt, posted 04-05-2006 10:22 PM carini has replied

  
inkorrekt
Member (Idle past 6082 days)
Posts: 382
From: Westminster,CO, USA
Joined: 02-04-2006


Message 47 of 108 (301386)
04-05-2006 10:20 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by ringo
03-08-2006 9:08 PM


Re: ID is not based on supernaturalism
You have answered your own question

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by ringo, posted 03-08-2006 9:08 PM ringo has not replied

  
inkorrekt
Member (Idle past 6082 days)
Posts: 382
From: Westminster,CO, USA
Joined: 02-04-2006


Message 48 of 108 (301387)
04-05-2006 10:22 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by carini
03-26-2006 2:55 PM


ID in History class!!!!!
How does ID fit in history class? Same can be asked of evolution too.Evolution is only a philosophy based on naturalisnm. How does evolution fit in Science class?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by carini, posted 03-26-2006 2:55 PM carini has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by carini, posted 04-07-2006 10:19 PM inkorrekt has replied
 Message 50 by ReverendDG, posted 04-08-2006 4:18 AM inkorrekt has not replied

  
carini
Inactive Member


Message 49 of 108 (302248)
04-07-2006 10:19 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by inkorrekt
04-05-2006 10:22 PM


Re: ID in History class!!!!!
ID is based on religion, in particular christian creationism, at least in the current view of most people on this forum. Most religions are part of history, dating back thousands of years. ID could be based off any number of world religious or societal views. Why is the bible's version the sole correct one? Many religions have views that the world was created by birds or snakes, why are these less correct then the bible? If you want to teach ID you must base it off all these world views and these are all part of history, not any form of science whatsoever.
Evolution is not a philosophy. It's a theory. The best working theory as to how life became the way it is today. Evolution is based on DNA, proteins, genetic mutations, etc. Evolutionary theory is based in chemistry, biology and physics. Now what are these classes?
They are science classes. You guessed it!!!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by inkorrekt, posted 04-05-2006 10:22 PM inkorrekt has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by inkorrekt, posted 04-08-2006 6:59 PM carini has replied

  
ReverendDG
Member (Idle past 4110 days)
Posts: 1119
From: Topeka,kansas
Joined: 06-06-2005


Message 50 of 108 (302285)
04-08-2006 4:18 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by inkorrekt
04-05-2006 10:22 PM


Re: ID in History class!!!!!
I liked the idea the prof had at ku, before ID nuts beat him up
it should fall under a religious exploration class, rather than a science class.
as i said before, if ID was in science this would be how it would go.
day1: "today class we will discuss Intelligent design, first it is an unknown,undetectible,unexplainible proccess produced by an unknown enitity, most likely god, with no way of detection or explaination that evolution or abiogenesis can't explain, yet it is right
day2: "as we have finished with ID lets move on to the flying spegetti monster, who created pirates and midgets and beer"
Evolution is only a philosophy based on naturalisnm. How does evolution fit in Science class?
it fits very well since, you can explain things with it and has evidence, it is not a philosophy, it is a theory and we see it happen every day

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by inkorrekt, posted 04-05-2006 10:22 PM inkorrekt has not replied

  
inkorrekt
Member (Idle past 6082 days)
Posts: 382
From: Westminster,CO, USA
Joined: 02-04-2006


Message 51 of 108 (302521)
04-08-2006 6:59 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by carini
04-07-2006 10:19 PM


Re: ID in History class!!!!!
Evolution is not a philosophy. It's a theory. The best working theory as to how life became the way it is today. Evolution is based on DNA, proteins, genetic mutations, etc. Evolutionary theory is based in chemistry, biology and physics. Now what are these classes?
I am not buying this. The trouble with all proponents of evolutionists is that they some how believe that by using scientific terminology as well as incorporating DNA,proteins, genetic mutations etc, they can convince everyone that Evolution is a Science. If evolution is science, then what is naturalism?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by carini, posted 04-07-2006 10:19 PM carini has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by nator, posted 04-08-2006 7:19 PM inkorrekt has not replied
 Message 53 by carini, posted 04-08-2006 10:54 PM inkorrekt has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 52 of 108 (302525)
04-08-2006 7:19 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by inkorrekt
04-08-2006 6:59 PM


Re: ID in History class!!!!!
quote:
If evolution is science, then what is naturalism?
There are two kinds of naturalism; ontological and methodological.
Ontological naturalism is the philosophical position that all that exists is the natural and that the supernatural does not exist.
Methodological naturalism posits that only that in nature which we can observe with our five senses can be explained using naturalistic explanations. It ignores the question of the existence or non-existence of the supernatural entirely.
The scientific method is based upon Methodological naturalism, and anyone doing real science uses methodological naturalism in their work.
No science is based upon ontological naturalism, nor is any scientist required to embrace ontological naturalism as a personal philosophy.
This is how it is possible that there are scientists of many different religions and philosophies but who all use methodological naturalism in their work.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by inkorrekt, posted 04-08-2006 6:59 PM inkorrekt has not replied

  
carini
Inactive Member


Message 53 of 108 (302559)
04-08-2006 10:54 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by inkorrekt
04-08-2006 6:59 PM


Re: ID in History class!!!!!
As a proponent of evolution its alot easier for me to imagine evolution occuring, then a "god" creating(poofing) everything into its current state. I see change in everyday life. I see how people change over time, life itself is about change. People and their understanding of things evolves over time.
I like complexity, not the simplest answer possible. In the case of how the world came to be the way it is today, ID in the form of christian creationism, is about the simplest explanation there is. Now if you came to me and said "God created evolution and thats is how he creates an endless supply of life to populate the earth". I would probably agree with you. He may have set everything in motion, but after that has let his creations run their course.
Why not try to imagine that god created evolution(yes god created evolution!!!!) so that life could adapt to different conditions on earth?
I think that something created everything, but it just set the basics in motion and then left the universe to itself.
I do not really disagree with ID, but its based on religious ideals for the most part. Most religious ideas are for the most part wrong about how the way the world is today. Even the catholic church eventually accepted that the earth wasn't the center of the universe. Eventually fundametalist creationists will see the light and accept that the world is very very old, that evolution is how life evolves and changes when faced with different climatic conditions and food sources.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by inkorrekt, posted 04-08-2006 6:59 PM inkorrekt has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by nator, posted 04-09-2006 8:39 AM carini has not replied
 Message 55 by RAZD, posted 04-09-2006 11:43 AM carini has not replied
 Message 56 by inkorrekt, posted 04-11-2006 10:40 PM carini has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 54 of 108 (302589)
04-09-2006 8:39 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by carini
04-08-2006 10:54 PM


Re: ID in History class!!!!!
quote:
I like complexity, not the simplest answer possible. In the case of how the world came to be the way it is today, ID in the form of christian creationism, is about the simplest explanation there is.
I would actually say that the ID/Creationist explanation is simplistic rather than simple.
This message has been edited by schrafinator, 04-09-2006 08:39 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by carini, posted 04-08-2006 10:54 PM carini has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by DominionSeraph, posted 04-15-2006 10:48 PM nator has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 55 of 108 (302605)
04-09-2006 11:43 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by carini
04-08-2006 10:54 PM


Re: ID in proper conception, and it's place in school.
As a proponent of evolution its alot easier for me to imagine evolution occuring, then a "god" creating(poofing) everything into its current state.
The question then becomes where the magic line is drawn ... evolutionary creationist, evolutionary theist, (and 'evolutionary' not needed for: ) Deist, Agnostic, whatever.
ID in the form of christian creationism, is about the simplest explanation there is.
No, ID in it's simplest conception, means that you take no preconceptions of any kind, and assume that no 'revelation' of design may be evident. You have to simplify, simplify, simplify, to get to the "simplest explanation" eh?
Introducing any religion (christian, hindu, whatever) to the mix complicates it, as there has to then be a correlation between the {ID concept used} and the {chosen faith}. There is certainly no need to assume christian creationism has any more valid a reconstruction than any other {religion\faith\belief}, so occam's bloody razor removes it.
The best you can assume is that the way the creation works can be understood based on the rules used to form it. This means all scientific avenues are valid, as they are attempts to reach the best understanding of the way the whole thing works.
Not only that, but it becomes imperative to pursue all lines of rigorous and logical thought - scientific and philosophical - so that you are not deceived by any apparent patterns and can seperate the wheat from the chaff.
The problem for ID is how to distinguish the view in one end of a kaleidoscope (an organized pattern) from the view in the other (a random jumble) when you don't understand the {system\function\behavior} of the kaleidoscope.
Carried to it's logical conclusion, ID (fully) becomes a form of Deism (instead of only a weak (corrupted?) sibling). What holds many IDeists back is the unwillingness to recognize those things they cannot change:
God, grant me serenity
to accept the things I cannot change,
courage to change the things I can
and wisdom to know the difference.
Scientific evidence is one of those things.
I like complexity, not the simplest answer possible.
Complexity has a function if it adds to the explanatory power of a concept (and it can be tested). This is the way the scientific theories grow (until some new simplifying paradigm\gut comes along). General Relativity is more complex than Newtonian physics.
Complexity that does not add to explanatory power usually reduces it and is thus counterproductive.
Eventually fundametalist creationists will see the light and accept that the world is very very old, that evolution is how life evolves ...
Fundamentalists and creationists will still be around - those that are YEC will become increasingly marginalized as the evidence continues to mount that the world is undeniably (rationally anyway) old, and will join other denial based beliefs, like flat-earthers - but the fundamentalists and creationists will find some way to reconcile (to themselves anyway) belief with the facts.
That being said (and to bring this thread back to the original topic ... ), the concept of ID is a philosophical concept that, when taken to it's logical conclusion, uses all of science as a tool. As such it does not belong in science class (in the same way that math is not taught in, say, physics or engineering or whatever classes) but in philosophy class.
This allows the full use of the structures of logic for theories, proofs (if possible) and deductions and a rational evaluation of all the evidence.
And it would have to have a history to be put in history class eh?
Enjoy.

Join the effort to unravel {AIDS\HIV} with Team EvC! (click)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by carini, posted 04-08-2006 10:54 PM carini has not replied

  
inkorrekt
Member (Idle past 6082 days)
Posts: 382
From: Westminster,CO, USA
Joined: 02-04-2006


Message 56 of 108 (303372)
04-11-2006 10:40 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by carini
04-08-2006 10:54 PM


Re: ID in History class!!!!!
This sounds just like Hindu philosophy. It is hard for me to imagine the universe to function by itself. For example, the planets are in their own orbits. If their motion is altered even by a fraction, it will affect the weather pattern of our planet.Life will become extinct if the temperature shifts outside the norms. Our planet maintains the necessary conditions so that plant and animal life will be sustained. There has to be something governing the entire universe. There was abeginning like the Big bang. There must also be an end. In between everything is sustained. How?
This message has been edited by inkorrekt, 04-11-2006 10:41 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by carini, posted 04-08-2006 10:54 PM carini has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by SuperNintendo Chalmers, posted 04-11-2006 10:44 PM inkorrekt has not replied
 Message 58 by crashfrog, posted 04-11-2006 11:24 PM inkorrekt has not replied
 Message 60 by nator, posted 04-12-2006 4:44 PM inkorrekt has not replied
 Message 61 by Minnemooseus, posted 04-12-2006 5:08 PM inkorrekt has not replied

  
SuperNintendo Chalmers
Member (Idle past 5834 days)
Posts: 772
From: Bartlett, IL, USA
Joined: 12-27-2005


Message 57 of 108 (303375)
04-11-2006 10:44 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by inkorrekt
04-11-2006 10:40 PM


Re: ID in History class!!!!!
This sounds just like Hindu philosophy. It is hard for me to imagine the universe to function by itself. For example, the planets are in their own orbits. If their motion is altered even by a fraction, it will affect the weather pattern of our planet.Life will become extinct if the temperature shifts outside the norms. Our planet maintains the necessary conditions so that plant and animal life will be sustained. There has to be something governing the entire universe. There was abeginning like the Big bang. There must also be an end. In between everything is sustained. How?
Textbook argument from incredulity. The universe is infinite... I am not at all surprised that a planet exists that supports life. Just because you can't imagine something doesn't mean it isn't so

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by inkorrekt, posted 04-11-2006 10:40 PM inkorrekt has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by jar, posted 04-11-2006 11:32 PM SuperNintendo Chalmers has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 58 of 108 (303387)
04-11-2006 11:24 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by inkorrekt
04-11-2006 10:40 PM


Re: ID in History class!!!!!
.Life will become extinct if the temperature shifts outside the norms.
Indeed. We could all die at any minute.
Welcome to the Universe! For a place people like you argue was created just for us to live in, it's surprisingly dangerous.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by inkorrekt, posted 04-11-2006 10:40 PM inkorrekt has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 59 of 108 (303393)
04-11-2006 11:32 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by SuperNintendo Chalmers
04-11-2006 10:44 PM


Re: ID in History class!!!!!
Now if someone found life that was not suited for its environment ...

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by SuperNintendo Chalmers, posted 04-11-2006 10:44 PM SuperNintendo Chalmers has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 60 of 108 (303602)
04-12-2006 4:44 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by inkorrekt
04-11-2006 10:40 PM


do you understand the difference now?
Ink, do you get what I am saying in Message #52?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by inkorrekt, posted 04-11-2006 10:40 PM inkorrekt has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024