Name of Student
Takinga Stand for Science
Takinga Stand for Science
Thefact that intelligent design or creationism is not a science isdisputable.ID, is based on religion for example, Christianity standon the faith that all living things including mankind were created bya supreme being-God.
Onthe flip side, science generally dwells on the theories professed byancient and contemporary scientists. A great percentage of scientificideas are proven! The `thrilling theory` was that of Charles Darwin,who was a British naturalist and geologist. He came up with thecontroversial theory of evolution famously known as Darwinism.
“Intelligentdesign is overwhelmingly deemed by scientific community as areligious belief not a scientific theory, therefore intelligentdesign is not appropriate content for science courses. “Said by thepresident of Ball State University-Jo Ann Gora.This is according to:http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/08/01/scientists-applaud-ball-state-presidents-position-intelligent-design#sthash.9viMN1SB.dpbsHYPERLINK"http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/08/01/scientists-applaud-ball-state-presidents-position-intelligent-design#sthash.9viMN1SB.dpbs.Seemingly,most".
Seemingly,most universities worldwide tend to edge out the concept of religionin science classrooms. Are the particular facilities being profane?Or is science viewed as being superior to creationism in ourvarsities? From the above link, the vice president of DiscoveryInstitute called Gora`s position `anti-academic freedom` and`Orwellian in the extreme` and an attempt to impose a `speech code`on faculty.
Essentially,science has brought enormous advantages to our social and healthlife, just to mention a few but does it mean that intelligent designhas no place to stand it`s theories? Christian faithful’s beliefthat God created mankind from His own image. How about a baby beingborn deformed! What does science say about this? Definitely, theanswer will be based on scientific facts-gene mutations.
Thebig question, is intelligent design a religious dogma in a scientificwrapper? It will be evidently a separation of church and state if thecourts will today rule in favor of science and scrap away intelligentdesign in our education curriculum. Interestingly, the occurrence ofthe two theories makes learning to be a freedom not making ourcurious academicians learn in a straightjacket state.
Ina nutshell, both intelligent design and science are valid when viewedin a diverse perspective a creation of a boundary between the twomight sound formal. For instance, intelligent design explains someissues in details. Similarly science does expound on ideas of itsjurisdiction bests. However, in the quest for taking a stand forscience according tohttp://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/08/01/scientists-applaud-ball-state-presidents-position-intelligent-design#ixzz307d2GbJ1 thecommitment to academic and basically scientific freedom isunflinching. This is because imposing a manipulation stunt on anymember of the university`s science faculty may create an illusion ofevidence of intelligent nature design. Academic freedom was meant tosecure the dissenting and unwanted faculty views. Therefore trying toredefine it as the freedom to teach science only, the majorityunderstanding is not that of academic freedom.
Inconclusion, the fact thatthe creation of science, intelligent design, and other worldviewsthat broadly focus on the speculations that relate to the origins oflife representing one another and the relevant form of human inquirythat is learnt appropriately in literature and courses of socialsciences. Such learning however, should include a difference ofworldviews that represent a wide range of religious and philosophicalperspectives and should also avoid privileging some people’s viewsto be more legitimate than that of others. Therefore, due to theadvantages that science has brought into our lives and taking intoconsideration greatpercentage of scientific ideas are proven, we should therefore standup and fight for the perpetuity of science.
FergusonK. Stephen Hawking: His Life and Work (2011). Chapter 6.