"John Lawson-Particle" <manticora_1@hotmail.com>
> Rather than solely teaching evolution at schools (which I
> whole-heartedly agree with), would it not be better to teach theories
> from all major and minor sciences and religions, and then let the kids
> work out what they believe to be the truth?
I object. It's not so much that people shouldn't consider alternatives, as
the fact that there ARE no real alternatives to evolutationary theory (that
I know of, anyway). The express goal of any such theory is to explain the
existence of organized complexity -- which evolutationary does, by claiming
that such complexity results one small step at a time, over billions of
years of cumulatitive natural selection.
Every "creationism" theory, by definition, attempts to explain the
existence of organized complexity by positing the existence of a
"Creator"... but I ask you: how much organized complexity does such a being
represent? Have they actually solved the problem? I don't think so...
For a graphic illustration, consider the "Cosmic Pyramid", which I have
lifted out of either Darwin's Dangerous Idea or The Blind Watchmaker (I
can't remember which):
GOD
Mind
Design
O r d e r
C h a o s
N o t h i n g
>From an evolutationary standpoint, this is truly a PYRAMID, with each level
supporting the one above it -- sometimes, tghe one above is merely an
"emergent" property of that below it, other times an evolutationary process
is needed to go up.
But, from an historical standpoint, it has always been conceived of as a
chandlier -- with GOD supporting those things below. As you can see, this
begs the question of what holds GOD up? Where does the support come from?
But I've been sidetracked again... If you are interested in this issue,
try:
The Alabama Insert: a study in ignorance and dishonesty
http://www.spacelab.net/~catalj/alabama/alabama.htm
Which is about a proposed insert into the biology textbooks of Alabama
state. Dawkins (I think -- it's been a while since I read this) really
slams it.
ERiC