Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Frank Apisa wrote:

Steve...

...I would caution against characterizing "the unknown" as "the unknowable."

We can be sure it is unknown...but we really don't know if it is unknowable.

"Perhaps unknowable" works...but "the unknown" has a certain elegance.

Yes, but Frank, do we know we don't know........are we sure? If we can't know, or don't, how do we know we don't know? It's unknown or so you say in your authoritative way. Or are we conflating the "unknowing" and the "unknown?"

Personally, I don't care who believes or needs to believe or not to believe in ID as long as it's not taught as science in any state supported science classroom. ID is religion, not science. Everybody but the unknowing knows that.

For me the only relevant jurisdictions are academic ones.

It might reasonably be argued that literature and poetry, for instance, are developments of a dimension of awareness of the world, while other arts, like music, may be creating, as it were, another world to be aware of. The latter would, therefore, be more like games than like science or history.

Quote:
It might reasonably be argued that literature and poetry, for instance, are developments of a dimension of awareness of the world, while other arts, like music, may be creating, as it were, another world to be aware of. The latter would, therefore, be more like games than like science or history.

Nobel Laureates Frown on Curriculum Plans


LAWRENCE, Kan. (AP) -- Thirty-eight Nobel Prize laureates asked state educators to reject proposed science standards that treat evolution as a seriously questionable theory, calling it instead the ''indispensable'' foundation of biology.

The group, led by the writer Elie Wiesel, said it wanted to defend science and combat ''efforts by the proponents of so-called intelligent design to politicize scientific inquiry.''