| The futile, but never-ending debate over which | | | | authorities (though much of that came later). Are we |
| account of human origins may or may not be taught | | | | really to believe the implicate of the claim above, |
| in public schools, drones on yet again. Most American | | | | namely, that no real science occured until after 1830 |
| Christians continue to fight the less-than-good fight, | | | | because most of the guys doing "science" at the |
| oblivious to the fairly obvious point that the Bible | | | | time were really just doing "religion disguised as |
| commands God's people, "Do not be yoked together | | | | science?" Isaac Newton even wrote a book on Bible |
| with unbelievers." This clearly requires Christians to | | | | prophecy. Does that make him a "non-scientific |
| avoid having their children taught by pagans -- | | | | quack?" Of course not.Fourth, if such persons as the |
| meaning that God requires them to avoid sending | | | | claimant who says, "Intelligent design is religion," fail to |
| their children to public schools. This is a sinful, but | | | | offer a cogent defintion of what religion is, then his |
| common, practice among baptized households.So | | | | claim falters as an entirely arbitrary indictment. On the |
| then, having said our mind on the subject, we move | | | | other hand, if any of these yokels ever actually get |
| onto the questions of logic as they pop up in the | | | | around to offering a definition of "religion," it will |
| debate. Several of the proponents of Mr. Darwin's | | | | inherently entangle them in real problems, since many |
| views have recently alleged that the doctrine of | | | | features of "religion" also show up in evolutionary |
| intelligent design ought not be taught in public schools | | | | views.For instance,1. Evolutionary biology depends on |
| because it presents an inherently "religious" view. | | | | the grand miracles of the "Big Bang" and |
| Several ways to nullify the intended effectiveness of | | | | "abiogenesis," and other miraculous leaps from one |
| this claim come to mind.First, we should like to note | | | | kind of thing to another -- which have not been |
| that no consensus exists among philosophers as to | | | | observed.2. Evolutionary cosmology (as taught in |
| how one might distinguish a religion from a philosophy. | | | | astronomy courses everywhere) forms an entire |
| Some would accept the claim that religions come | | | | worldview, a required way of looking at the world |
| with rituals or ceremonies, while philosophies do not. | | | | through the lenses of naturalistic, subtle change as |
| But variants of ancient Orphism, Pythagoreanism and | | | | the ultimate cause of everything.3. Evolutionary |
| Neo-Platonism come with mystical symbols and | | | | biology has major tenets -- adaptation, natural |
| opaque rituals -- some of which symbols were taken | | | | selection, micromutation, survival of the fittest, etc.4. |
| up by later forms of Kabbala -- and these ancient | | | | Evolutionary biology requires beliefs in what cannot |
| views are usually construed as philosophies, not | | | | and have not been observed - the unseen. This is |
| religions. And, quite curiously, one of the more | | | | why evolutionary literature contains the ubiquitous |
| interesting philosophies of the ancient world, taught | | | | refrain -- "we cannot observe evolution happening |
| by one "Anaximander" (ca. 550 B.C.), contained most | | | | today because it occurs so slowly."5. Those |
| of the central postulates native to the views of a | | | | communities which regard it as true employ a unique |
| certain -- you guessed it -- "Charlie Darwin."Second, | | | | vocabulary to express those beliefs.6. Evolutionary |
| "religions" are person-relative. This means that no | | | | biology and cosmology imply certain answers -- and |
| particular view (by itself) may properly count as | | | | logically forbid others -- to the grand questions of life, |
| "religion," since what one does or does not DO WITH | | | | "What kind of world is this?" (metaphysics), "How do |
| THE BELIEFS in question has an important bearing on | | | | we know what we know?" (epistemology), "What is |
| the point at hand. If no ceremony or ritual of any | | | | the nature of humanity?" (philosophical or religious |
| kind attends the view in question, this makes it hard | | | | anthropology), "What is proper human behavior?" |
| to justify the "religion" claim. For [counter-] instance, | | | | (ethics), etc., etc. Thus, by any defintion of religion I |
| Aristotle believed in "intelligent design," but very few | | | | can imagine, if "intelligent design" counts as religion, |
| would call his worldview "religious," though his ideas | | | | how much more will evolutionary views be painted |
| do tend to show up in university philosophy courses | | | | with the same brush?So it seems appropriate here to |
| quite a bit. Also, many of the French "Enlightment" | | | | finish our answer to the original question with a |
| Deists were quite arguably nonreligious -- if not | | | | phrase from a game traditionally beloved by |
| irreligious -- persons, even though they affirmed | | | | mathematicians:"Check mate."Carson Day has written |
| "intelligent design."Third -- and we need to keep | | | | some 1.3 gazillion articles and essays on all manner of |
| beating this drum -- almost every scientist prior to | | | | topics. These aim to glorify God and offer people real |
| 1830 believed in intelligent design. And the majority of | | | | help to live wisely and well. You can visit Carson's |
| scientists kept believing in it until around 1870 or so. | | | | websites at (The Omniblog, where Carson blogs |
| When Darwin published his "Origin of Species" (1859), | | | | everything) or (Carson's Day Trading Outpost). |
| he met with his hottest disputes from other | | | | Thanks for stopping by. |
| scientists like Robert Owen, not from ecclesiastical | | | | |