Should Intelligent Design be taught in science class?

[Turtle]

Originally Posted by questor

Turtle, are we to assume you are also against the teaching of evolution since that theory does not boast answers to all its questions? and perhaps literature since it is more about feelings and opinions.?

___Well...since you put it that way, yes. I am against teaching any topic that skips ahead without substantive background. Stellar mechanics belongs in a collegiate venue because the math required is based on years of developing mathematical concepts at the lower levels.
___I taught swimming & water safety for decades & you don't teach the butterfly to someone who can't even float. If I had, people would be dead. I see it as a logically dangerous propositon.

[questor]

Turtle, i know you are not thinking of abolishing all liberal arts classes because they don't have a mathmatical background. some people ( the right brainers) do not function on mathmatical wiring but they do produce works of art and philosophy. don't we need a mix?

[HydrogenBond]

What ID brings to the table is order instead of random. The laws of physics are based on cause and effect, which is orderred. Evolution is based too much on random, which allows science to skip over events. Random is based on scientific faith. ID has faith in Divine order, while evolution has faith in random. Maybe the solution is in the middle , orderring principles of nature driving what appears to be random events. For example, most rivers meander (order), each with a slightly different profile (random).

[Turtle]

Originally Posted by questor

Turtle, i know you are not thinking of abolishing all liberal arts classes because they don't have a mathmatical background. some people ( the right brainers) do not function on mathmatical wiring but they do produce works of art and philosophy. don't we need a mix?

___I don't intend to abolish no, but rather put things in their logical sequence. If you haven't noticed a theme in my musings, let me clarify. No study, no investigation, no human pursuit , advances or even exists without invoking mathematics. A primary principle of math is ordination & without that principle there is no first anything. Whether a person understands a math principle or not is moot to its existence.

[questor]

i think you are correct. there is mathmatical ordination at the bottom of everything. how then do you think a random series of events caused the big bang, or gravity. or orbits, or life, or thought?

[Biochemist]

I am closing this thread due to length and lack of focus. If the anyone wants to start a more focused thread (per my earlier post) please feel free.

Bio