mkolpin
Inactive Member
|
|
Message 8 of 108 (281286)
01-24-2006 2:58 PM
|
Reply to: Message 1 by Jman 01-08-2006 3:33 PM
|
|
I don't think ID has a place in science class because, ultimately, it is not science. Science deals with the natural, and ID deals with the supernatural. Also, in order for something to be scientific, it must be falsifiable. ID is not falsifiable. Clearly, ID is not scientific, so there is no reason for it to be included in science class. However, there are certain arguments used in the ID theory that are scientific, such as irreducible complexity. I think it makes sense for irreducible complexity to be introduced in science class as evidence against evolution, but I don't think it is fair for a designer to be mentioned in a science class.
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 21 by inkorrekt, posted 02-28-2006 10:25 PM | | mkolpin has not replied |
|