Introduction
Intelligent design and evolution all provide explanations on the origin of life in the universe. There exists considerable scientific evidence to justify the plausibility of the two theories, however, a great debate that has been there for a long time is to what constitutes science. Many public schools in the US are torn whether to incorporate intelligence design in their curriculum or not as the evolutionists have opposed any measure aimed at introducing intelligence design in the curriculum. As the debate continues, students in the public schools in the country are being limited in their critical thinking in regards to intelligent design against evolution.
It may be possible that students in private schools provide applicable fora for the discussion of intelligent design versus evolution. Discussion of intelligent design and evolution controversy is based on the arguments that their proponents generate, whether the former should be taught in schools, and whether it should be viewed as a science.
Darwinian Evolution
Evolution hypothesizes that all things change over time, but Darwinian evolution is more than just a transformation over a certain period. In the Darwinian postulate of natural selection, evolution utilizes independent variations that are no longer in use to an organism by merely eliminating them (Scheiner and Mindell 172). Through numerous variations over millions of years, evolution is seen to have led to rising of many organisms in the universe by natural means. More precisely, evolution does not suppose design, or an investor, for that matter, as nature acts spontaneously (Scheiner and Mindell 66-67).
Naturalism or otherwise, methodological naturalism according to intelligent design promoters is the philosophical view adopted by the evolutionists, and it only propagates naturalistic explanations for the origin and creation of the universe (Scheiner and Mindell 174). For many years, evolution has become the dominant scientific supposition that depends on naturalism to explain a purposeless universe.
Over the last few centuries, the history of evolution has been developed and established. Evolution sprung out of the scientific investigation during the historical period of the Age of the enlightenment in the later years of the seventeenth century (Scheiner and Mindell 26-27). With technological advancements, the scientists began to drift away from the superstitions and began to depend on empirical explanations that were majorly based on measurable data.
After about two hundred years, Charles Darwin further developed the idea of evolution by publishing On the Origin of Species, which proposed natural selection as the chief mechanism for evolution (Scheiner and Mindell 26). Darwin then defined natural selection as the process of slow transformation, preservation, and accretion of successive slight favorable variations (Scheiner and Mindell 48). Accordingly, Darwinian evolution began to change the scientific understanding over the next one hundred and years as scientists permitted naturalism to guide their research.
Since Darwin’s days, the universe has experienced saturation of evolution through naturalism; posing a great problem to many biologists and other life scientists in the current world. Due to the fact that many scientific learning institutions in the world allow critical thinking through the naturalism view, many scientific organizations have determined evolution as the only permissible scientific theory (Scheiner and Mindell 65). Therefore, learners are not usually given a choice between the two competing views of intelligent design and evolution that have been oppugning for a long period.
Intelligent Design
Understanding intelligent design requires an individual to grasp its roots in teleology. By description, teleology deals with the study of understanding the intentionality and purpose in nature that seeks to answer the questions that begin with why (Meyer 185). This particular school of thought is fundamental when arguing for the design in the universe because there is a barrage of questions pertaining to function rather than just the description.
The theory of intelligent design is based on recent scientific discoveries and what is known about the cause-and effect structure of the world (Meyer 184). In simple terms, intelligent design depends on what is known about patterns of the evidence that show intuitive causes. Therefore, intelligent design is not an inferable from, or an explication of, a religious text such as the Bible or Quran but rather a deductive of scientific evidence.
While it is undeniable that many scientists and philosophers have recognized the pattern of design viewed in nature, it has not been until fairly recently that modern science has explained the complexity of the universe. For instance, scientists truly saw how sophisticated a ‘simple cell’ could look like (Meyer 190-191). Currently, many scientists are questioning how it could be possible to explain all the complex workings of nature without a designer (Meyer 185). The intelligent design theory recognizes that the complexity of nature could be best described through a designer rather than the unguided process and that is where the postulation differs totally with the Darwinian evolution.
Intelligent design theory has also received criticism from other people who are not evolutionists but are scientists who ascribe to the secular view of science. This particular group of people argues that the intelligent design theory is a threat to modern science (Meyer 232). The threat comes from the initial declaration of the pioneers of intelligent design that they were focusing on educating the world to view science from another perspective (Meyer 234). Nevertheless, since many conferences on intelligent design after its inception, the theory has received recognition from different influential personalities such the former US president George Bush and even the former Catholic pontiff, Benedict (Meyer 180). Due to the influence and power the personalities wield in the society, the theory has been accepted in many parts of the US despite the tough debates that have surrounded it.
Debates on Intelligent Design
Whether Intelligent Design Should Be Taught in Schools
A question of whether intelligent design should be taught in school in the US has arisen many times. The answers that are gotten are sometimes startling but they often reflect the respondent’s critical analysis skills as well as the understanding of the theory. On a personal level, I would recommend the theory to be taught in school especially for the college students for a number of reasons. Firstly, the intelligent design theory is being used by almost everyone either knowingly or unknowingly.
For example, the creationist speakers and writers have used the theory to defend the truth that is found in the Genesis of the Bible (Meyer 234). It means that the postulation has formed part of human life and the whole society that it cannot be ignored. Secondly, the thesis of should be taught in colleges because its exclusion from the curriculum would mean disbarring critical analysis techniques that are most commonly developed in students by debating and asking questions (Meyer 183). Most probably the parents to the students who are informed may raise complaints why their sons and daughters are not taught to think like scientists.
Whether Intelligent Design Should Be Considered a Science or Humanity
The conjecture of intelligent design should be taught in biology classes alongside evolution and not in humanities or religion classes. Notably, the theory is science based because there exist numerous scientific works that have been written by doctorate holders for the proposition and therefore it cannot form part of the humanities (Meyer 180). In addition, the theory should also be taught alongside evolution in the biology classes to enable the students to learn of the evidences that challenge Darwinian evolution (Meyer 183).
This cannot be the case when the theory was to be separated from biological sciences. Moreover, the theory postulates that certain features of the natural world are better explained by an intelligent cause rather than an undirected materialistic process, and therefore opposes the creationist theory of religion (Meyer 183). The difference which is quite evident in the theory from creationist theory makes it hard to incorporate the two under religion which depends entirely on personal conviction and not empirical evidence. Without doubt, the hypothesis of intelligent design is purely science and therefore is incompatible to humanities or religion because the premises of the theory do not entirely agree with religious teachings.
Conclusion
In summary, the ongoing debate which has pitted evolutionists against intelligent design proponents is grounded on whether intelligent design should be incorporated in US schools curricula and whether it should be recognized as a science. Evolutionists have depended on naturalism to explain the meaningless universe. As one of the pioneer theories in scientific research, evolution did gain acceptance among many scientists in the nineteenth century. Later on, a new theory emerged, a postulation known as the intelligent design that depended on teleology to establish itself. Nonetheless, the latter theory has received opposition from the evolutionists whose arguments are that the theory has no scientific basis. Therefore, the heated debate on whether intelligent design should be included in school curricula has made it difficult for students in public schools to develop their critical thinking skills robustly.
Works Cited
Meyer, Stephen. “Chapter 4: Intelligent Design.” Four Views on Creation, Evolution, and Intelligent Design, edited by Joe Stump and Stanley Gundry, HarperCollins Publishers, 2017, pp. 180-239.
Scheiner, Samuel, and David Mindell, editors. The Theory of Evolution. The University of Chicago Press, 2020.