Thursday, August 04, 2005

Evolution and creationism/intelligent design

For the intelligent, there is no question that intelligent design is an extension of religion; Christian religion to be precise. If intelligent design proponents really weren't trying to push Christianity, then this (thanks Critch!) would certainly be in the curriculum as well.

Creationists/intelligent design proponents should firstly become familiar with the proper terminology surrounding the debate. First and foremost: theory. As in "the theory of evolution".

And while the "giant spaghetti monster" certainly is a funny agitprop, I think it is probably counterproductive in its excess. People don't like being called out on their hypocrisy. But more importantly, I think to oppose absurdity, one must use moderation.

As far as evolution and creationism go... When I was a kid, I used to use the word "weird" to describe things that were strange, in a negative way. One day someone said to me, "weird" is just another word for "different", so from then on, everytime I used the word "weird", I thought "different", and suddenly different things weren't so negative. It's funny how language shapes perception.

My feelings on religion and science can be similarly explained. So if you get the urge to explain something unknown by saying "God did it" (or any other deity/deities), say "I don't know", instead.
Person 1: Holy crap! How did you survive that plane crash??
Person 2: It was the will of Ganesh.

Person 1: Holy crap! How did you survive that plane crash??
Person 2: I don't know.

Person 1: How did humans come to be?
Person 2: God created us.

Person 1: How did humans come to be?
Person 2: I don't know.

It should become clear that religion is not science. Religion is not knowledge. Religion is a placeholder for knowledge.

3 comments:

Heather said...

But the flying spaghetti monster is all-knowing! Piracy Represents ARRRRRRRRRRRR.

Sorry.

Sean said...

Why does the “right” think we need to teach creationism/intelligent design along with evolution in public schools but should only teach abstinence when it comes to sex ed – why does needing to “teach both sides” only come into play when they are trying to crowbar something into schools but not when it comes to teaching kids how not to get pregnant and drop out of school?
-Sean
WaywardPuppy.com

Gabe said...

It's just how people are. Everyone pushes for their own view. It's a social Darwinism. The problem is, it's hard to keep level-headed about something that you think is so obviously wrong. Both sides are doing what they think is best for society.

I tend to think that if you take away reason-depriving biases, everyone will end up on the same page, but I guess that would be assuming everyone is reasonable at heart.