I agree. The "Intelligent Design theory" is mostly a matter of after-the-fact rationalization. (It's not as though Darwinism is exempt from this stuff: the sociobiologists present a lot of "just so" stories.)
On 11/29/06, Charles Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Very nice article. Another positive result of teaching creationism as well as evolution might be that in the debate with creationism, an evolutionist may be forced to clarify and explain evolutionary theory more than if it is taught by itself. Arguing in a debate forces sharper presentation. In contrast with its opposite in creationism, evolutionary theory is more clearly defined. Evolutionary theory is "intelligible happenstance" or "rational chance". These qualities are forced to our attention and made explicit in trying to explain and distinguish it from "intelligent design". Charles
-- Jim Devine / "Crime seems to change character when it crosses a bridge or a tunnel. In the city, crime is taken as emblematic of class and race. In the suburbs, though, it's intimate and psychological - resistant to generalization, a mystery of the individual soul." -- Barbara Ehrenreich
