Quote:
Originally Posted by Buffy
Actually what I'm really asking is what we *do* about it. To a certain extent, some scientists are at fault too: the latest Discover mag has an article on Richard Dawkins in which even he admits that his religion-hostile, "Darwin's Rottweiler" image is counterproductive in convincing folks of the issues described above.
I'm suggesting that we do need to do something "Lest Darkness Fall" (that's a great book!), and the question is, what do we do?
|
IMO, what to do is to maintain respect and honor. For sure maintain wits and principles, but not if that will cost respect and honor. So, invite ID'ers (and whomever) into the proverbial room, welcome them and when discussion time is over thank them for their contributions. Keep the door open.
IMO, it's that simple. Oh, and anywhere you see "them" in above paragraph, be willing to replace it with "us" and you'll stay one step ahead.
From someone else on this thread, I was getting gist of another important point. Science itself isn't under siege. The scientific method is going to be okay, even if certain theories and isms are shot down and considered wrong for our kids.
It's the dogma that is being shaken from science. IMO, that's a very good thing. Those who think materialism and empiricism are the end all and be all of validity and fact are receiving an overdue wakeup call. I'm not saying those paradigms are false, but would argue they are belief systems that are tinged with own versions of psuedo-scientific hypothesis and conclusions.
I am one who is spiritual of the New Agey type, but this doesn't mean I abandon my (earthly) senses. I also feel within me high appreciation for science, within Reason. Without balance of spirituality / philosophy (both historical basis of scientific methodology), I think scientific practice, in the hands of some, would run amok (even more than it sometimes appears to).
I'm one who kinda sorta subscribes to Intelligent Design. But not from orthodox Christian perspective. No siree bob. I'm still formulating my hypothesis and admittedly, this is around 64th on my list of life's priorities. But in my worldview, scientific methodology is, how you say, manifestation of Intelligent Designer's consciousness within known universe. For me, Creator isn't out there, over yonder. Creator is within All, still manifesting Universe as we know it. For me scientific methodology and practice is "proof" of ID.
I don't expect my uncommon perspective on ID to be taught equally side by side with prevailing theories of evolution (and even Creation), but I'll let you in on a little secret that apparently R. Dawkins is starting to realize. Keep telling me that my ideas have no basis for acceptance in any rational discussion and has no place in scientific education, and guess what, it motivates me to push that much more, in ways that are no longer about openness and honoring, and are instead all about dogma and righteousness.
It can be both Evolution and Creation,
unless you are personally threatened by the way things Are.
Namaste,
Jway
