My HUGE problem with creationist thinking (re: Which version of creationism)

Right, so you have to go with a diluted-down vague non-descript version of creation like Intelligent Design.If there was a basis in empirical observation for Intelligent Design, then it could be an acceptable part of a science course. No, because it doesn't have anything to do with race. Perhaps, "biased" or mayby "bigoted" would be a better word. THis becomes irrelevant if you're not going to teach specific creation stories.

I didn't make it up, but here you go:

quote:

---

The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.

---

If we could find empirical evidence that suggests that, say, some biological function had to have emerged via a diliberate and guided process, then we could teach about that evidence in a biology class.

Not exactly, but whatever, its beside the point. Your delimma is solved by using a non-descript version of creationism like ID. The next problem is finding the empirical evidence for it. Maybe, I dunno. Depends on how much he has to follow the Bible versus how much he wants to follow empirical evidence.By the way, have you ever heard of roleplaying? Taz isn't being serious.

Kind of, but not really. Meh, not so much... it doesn't have to.For example, there had to have been a common ancestor between chimps and humans for the ToE to be correct. Only if you force the certainty beyond the normal tentativity-included everyday usage of the words.

Huh? I think I'm following you...You're saying that if you decide to teach creationism, then picking one particular version and only teaching that is prejudiced. I don't think anyone disagrees with that.As I've explained, one solution to that dilemma is to teach an overarching all-inclusive creationism like ID. But, again: BUT, we would have to have empirical evidence of ID to include it in a science curriculum. Now, if we did have that evidence, then there wouldn't be any problems teaching ID in a science class. You wouldn't be dismissing any cultural belief anymore than the current teaching of evolution does.Make sense?

---

The truth of our faith becomes a matter of ridicule among the infidels if any Catholic, not gifted with the necessary scientific learning, presents as dogma what scientific scrutiny shows to be false. - St. Thomas Aquinas

We should have a new thread on this...Race, as a classification, has value to Affirmative Action, no?