Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Intelligent design gets a place in the philosophy classrooms of secular Knox College
(By Liz Kemmerer, Science & Theology News, April 27, 2006)

Knox College in Galesburg, Ill., recently completed its first run of a one-of-a-kind course taught by a one-of-a-kind professor. In December, Martin Roth, a professor of philosophy of science at the secular private college taught a short philosophy course titled "Intelligent Design" to explore the topic historically and critically. A concentrated course, it made its debut during the college winter break from Nov. 29 to Dec. 16 with students meeting for three-hour sessions three times a week for three weeks.

Discussion-based courses often generate a flood of possibilities in the classroom. That's what Roth was after.

"I want to see what topics the students were interested in, what they pick up on, which directions they want to go," he said. The students enjoyed the material and appreciated that the arguments presented were far less tainted and silly than they were accustomed to, he added.

"Anti-Darwinists claim that you're killing God and pro-Darwinists claim he's already dead," said Micah Riecker, a senior creative writing major from Traverse City, Mich. "It just keeps spinning because people are so uninformed about what is going on. All of the students are now very much aware that the issue is far more complicated than implied by the media," Roth added.

In each three-hour class, Roth's goal was not to simply lecture but rather to review the material and explore varying viewpoints. Questions concerning ethical implications would often arise as the students progressed through the material. Such questions, however, allow the students to work through their ideas, said Roth.

"The class was very interesting to me because I knew very little about what the whole idea with intelligent design was," said Ricker. "I went in without any kind of firm footing. But Dr. Roth is an incredible teacher, and he had us reading the groundwork for the arguments for and against ID right away."

To add to the give-and-take, a member of the biology faculty and a local clergyman were invited as guest speakers, which, Roth said, the students enjoyed. The clergyman offered his belief that science is not separate from religion in that it is basically a philosophy. Following him was the biology faculty member who listed specific examples of how Darwinian theory has proven itself in science. The setting was treated as both discussion and debate with the two speakers arguing for and against intelligent design.


Roth designed the course to "look at intelligent design on three levels: as an argument for the existence of God, as an alternative to evolution in science, and in the context of the current debate over evolution and religion." According to Roth, it is important to understand that ID is not something recently installed on today's front page like an ice block to cool the seething evolution-creation debate. Rather, "intelligent design has a long history. The idea originated well before Darwin's work in the 1850s," Roth said.

The course delves into the history of the intelligent design movement, beginning with Plato, the first Western philosopher to make an argument for the existence of God based upon the design of this world. Our seemingly miraculous biological design and the fine-tuning of the universe allowing for the existence of life have become the chief supports for this argument. The class also tackled current scientific debates, including Darwin's argument for natural selection and whether or not intelligent design fits into the category of science as enterprise. Finally, the class discussed the multifaceted question of how this affects religion and morality.

The response generated from Roth's class has been overwhelmingly positive among students and faculty. "Various school administrators have told me that they heard positive things about the course from students who enrolled in it," Roth said. It appears that students who participated received a better explanation of intelligent design than they expected. "I gathered from the enthusiasm and interest with which they discussed matters that they were engaged with the topic," said Roth.

"Dr. Roth was very good to us and treated the issue fairly," Riecker said. "We were given the best of both sides." Even some of Knox's prospective students and their parents shared in the enthusiasm, having applauded the fact that Knox offers a course addressing this subject, Roth said. With the momentum resulting from the course, it looks probable that these prospective students will have the opportunity to experience it for themselves.

The principal reading material was Debating Design by Michael Ruse as well as excerpts and articles by William Dembski and others on intelligent design and natural selection. In addition, the class studied some chapters of Phillip E. Johnson's Darwin on Trial and Moral Darwinism: How We Became Hedonists by Benjamin Wiker and Dembski.

It proves that ID and evolution can be discussed on a intellectual level when one side or the other doesn't ram it down the other's throats. What the piece was missing was if any conclusion was achieved.

All of the students are now very much aware that the issue is far more complicated than implied by the media," Roth added.

But Dr. Roth is an incredible teacher, and he had us reading the groundwork for the arguments for and against ID right away."

The response generated from Roth's class has been overwhelmingly positive among students and faculty.

Perhaps anti IDers wish to give the impression that they are members of such an elite by taking a theoretical abstract stance at odds with the social realities but as it is often self-evident from their literary capacities that no such designation is applicable one is left to ponder their possible Marxist or left-wing ideals.

All of the students are now very much aware that the issue is far more complicated than implied by the media," Roth added.

no all-knowing interior/exterior decorator who has thrown out the old drapes over-and-over again for new drapes.

spendi, It's only "complicatiom" are to those people that refuses to "see" what's available as proof for evolution. Trying to mingle ID with science makes no sense. ID is completely subjective emotionalism. Science is observation and interpretation. There's no way to marry the two topics - ever.

(chumly: i think spendius is not concerned about the scientific merits of either intelligent design or evolution. he simply feels that teaching evolution would somehow lead to moral corruption.)

If I thought there were anything to reincarnation, I'd peg spendi as this era's Montague Summers.

timber wrote-

Quote:

If I thought there were anything to reincarnation, I'd peg spendi as this era's Montague Summers.

Tried him. Totally unreadable. Not a spark to set my gas on fire.