I'm torn
The whole intelligent design debate has me confused, and torn.On the one hand, I think the people who are pushing this are Jesus freaks with too much time and certainly too much special interest money on their hands.
On the other hand, I think most of us who believe in some kind of higher power -- even those of us who's belief hinges on something so amorphous and disconnected with day-to-day life that we're loath to talk about it -- can agree that there's a method behind the madness of creation. I mean, we're all just so freakin' well designed. (Except for the belly button. I don't get the point.)
The problem, of course, is that our friends on the right wing refuse to acknowledge any of Darwin's findings. Which is what I don't get: Why can't you say, 'OK, God drew up the blueprints, and then got out of the way.' Or even more directly, 'Who do you think created the genes of life that allowed Darwin's ancestors to evolve from monkeys so he could one day explain evolution? God!"
I know, I know. It all boils down to the Bible, right? And the fact that a certain segment of our population (I'd say the inbred segment, but I have some loved ones who sit on the right side of the political spectrum, so . . . ) thinks that the Bible has to be the absolute, literal truth just as Antonin Scalia says it's a legal sin to consider the Constitution the framework for an evolving set of laws and principles. (In other words: The Bible can't just be stories with an overarching message! That tree burned!)
But can't we all just get along? Isn't there a healthy in-between that we can agree to occupy, if only to ensure that the rest of the world doesn't look at us and think, "What a bunch of idiots?"
The Gap makes Judybat's head hurt. I'll talk pants any day over this.
posted by AnnaRay at 3:08 PM
19 Comments:
Dropping intelligent design won't make the rest of the world stop thinking we're a bunch of idiots. We'll always be the country that elected George W. for a second term, and it's hard to pass as a thoughtful, intelligent nation after that.
True, but Canadians are a forgiving bunch. At least I'm hoping.
I too do not understand why people insist on this science vs. religion battle, like it has to be one or the other. Jesus freaks do it, but so do some science-y people and I just don't get it. I like to think that the majority of people can hold more than one idea in their head at a time, and thus can believe that God made the plan and then evolution happened or whatever. Personally I find "or whatever" to be a helpful belief system.
The question to me is not whether both should be taught, I believe that both should be taught. The question to me is where should they be taught. Why is it that faith based non science matters must be taught in science classes? Can't we leave that which can be taught scientifically to the science class and that which is a faith based philosophy to, well, a philosophy class? Why is there not a religion class in highschool that spends equal time on all forms of religion? Why is it so difficult to seperate the two? More over, what is this freakin need to ask why? Personally I'm happy knowing that I think and that because of that I am.
Thinking is dangerous, cynicali.
LBS, send me your email address. And your spouse's. My spouse would like to chat with him.
Now back to our regularly scheduled rant. God told me so.
Apparently, I'm not the only one who is confused. I don't usually agree with Charles K., but on this one . . .
From Friday's Post
Here's what really chaps my ass in the current debate. The Kansas school board replaced its previous definition of science, "the human activity of seeking natural explanations for what we observe in the world around us," with 45 or so weasel words.
I don't care if schools teach my kids that the universe was created by Yahweh, Pat Robertson, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster... but if schools teach my kids to replace clarity with obfuscation, they're not deserving of being called schools.
Brian, I like the Flying Spaghetti Monster as the Creator. Finally, some freakin' answers that I can connect with! But first someone would have to teach the Kansas School Board what obfuscation means.
I was interviewing one of these "intelligent" design guys from Ohio and it seems to be a matter of self-esteem. He went on about how it's no wonder our society is falling apart when we teach our children that they came from pond scum. One day God said man and 'poof' there he was. Then, as your son figured out recently, being by yourself can be fun and all but it's not enough, so then 'poof' woman. Much more fun!
Scott, I am not sure that I follow your narrative about God, men, women, sons, fun, and poofs, but your conversation with the intelligent-design believer sure did get me thinkin'.
My college philosophy degree is pretty much wasted, but I do remember that a lot of serious thinkers, not all of them from Ohio, have believed that there's no other place to ground a workable system of values other than on a God that a lot of people believe in. So if people think that our society is falling apart, and they also see a rising tide of secularism, they're probably going to infer a link. To such people, science's claim to have no fight with religion won't hold a lot of water: if science claims to be able to explain stuff without a God, then it's just like everything else around here these days that doesn't need God, and thus it's in need of a popeslap.
As for me, I don't think our society is falling apart-- at least, not for the reasons folks in Columbus think it is. And I do have a close personal relationship with my deity...or, at least, I would if it wasn't for all this gloppy marinara sauce.
Personally, I think you're all going to hell.
I think it's ironic that people believe that social values must be based on a Godly order - i.e. people will only behave morally if they have the fear of God's retribution - because I can think of some pretty pius people (George W. for one) whose behavior is unconscionably amoral. Meanwhile, I don't lie or cheat or steal or kill or plunder the world's resources for my personal gain; I pay my taxes and try to live respectfully of other people, all without the benefit of Belief. Of course, I do sleep with a woman, so you're right, AnnaRay; I am going to hell.
Judybat you brought up a point that irks me. I don't need to be threatened in order to live well. Being the best person I can be serves me well enough without the threat of eternal damnation looming over each mortal breath.
Amen, Brother.
Admit it, Anna. You just like Krauthammer's column because he uses the word "lemur."
-- Jeff D.
You got me, Heffe.
10 points for the person who remembers my second-favorite word.
diverticulitis?
Could we talk about why Anthropologie has such tiny,expensive and totally cute clothes? Intelligent design debating makes my head hurt.
You know why your head hurts?
Because God said so.
I had two points I wanted to contribute, but lbs (some sceintists are jsut as doctrinairre and unforgivign as some fundamentalist religiousoids) and cynicali (it shouldn't be science vs. religion; both can do just fine on their own without eliminating the other) have them pretty well covered.
So I'll just note that my own version of Flying Spaghetti Monsterism invovles alfredo sauce, not marinara. And mushrooms!
Jan,
From the quality of your post and your spelling it seems that you favor wine (whine) over Alfredo.
Post a Comment
<< Home