|
I can see teaching that there may be a designer/creator in a philosophy class. After all almost every one of us is curious where and how the universe came to be.
But if I understand the ID proponents correctly, they are postulating that this designer/creator is taking an active role in how life is evolving. You know, design an eye here, create a brain there, etc.. because these things are too complicated to have evolved without the designer's personal touch along the way. And they want to teach this involvement in science class. IMHO, this is just too much of a stretch to teach as a science.
However we do think we know through science that things are evolving whether they were started by a designer/creator or not. It is the study of this evolution which should be taught in science class. If there are holes in the evolutionary chain or things look to be overly complicated, just point them out along with the fact that we don't understand everything yet. I see no need to fill that void with an active designer as part of science class.
|