Tuesday, September 06, 2005

Scientific Wondering

Good commentary by Rebecca Keller here. She notes, in part:

No scientist should ever be so committed to an ideology, whether that ideology is religious or philosophical in nature, that it blinds him to possible interpretations of scientific data. That happened in Galileo's time and it is happening today whenever people close their eyes and plug their ears to design inferences in biology.

Living things are incredibly complex. Even on the
microscopic scale each cell is literally packed with interacting networks of molecular machines. It looks designed. If it looks designed, how can it be unscientific to wonder if that design is real?

. . . .

How is it less religious or less controversial to teach evolution as it is now, pretending that we somehow know that there is no design?

The only way to be religiously neutral on a subject such as evolution is to acknowledge what we know and what we don't know. Virtually all of our students come into class knowing that evolution is controversial. Pretending it's not, passing off students' questions with patronizing non-answers, or pretending "science" really knows that there is no design in biology is certainly not good educational practice.

Hat tip to Uncommon Descent.


Post a Comment

<< Home