I'm writing in response to the recent board editorial that callously grouped intelligent design theorists as the ideological equivalents of young earth creationists. The former group consists principally of biochemists critical of Darwinian theorists' failure to explain the irreducible complexity that exists in fundamental biochemical and cellular systems, whereas the latter group denies scientific knowledge and relies on the inerrancy of The Bible.
Cate Doty criticizes intelligent design for relying on a supernatural designer but then continues her criticism by saying intelligent design theorists cannot be taken seriously because they do not designate a particular God as designer. Intelligent design theorists do not want to prove the existence of any one religion's ultimate reality. They set out to show science cannot properly account for alternate theories of evolution because scientific dogmatists rule out design theory a priorias an underlying assumption of their materialist philosophy.
The conceptual net of science is tattered with holes that force challenges of materialist philosophy's underlying assumptions to slip through and appear as fallacious arguments. Just because something is rational within a discipline does not mean it is reasonable. To obtain reason, all disciplines must be weighed equally. Science bypasses reason and settles for rationality that preys on ignorance. When people blindly follow scientific philosophy without questioning its assumptions, truth cannot be found.
Schools teach natural selection, which is not problematic in that it is perhaps the most convincing explanation of human evolution. However, teachers do not offer any doubt to its validity, which is wrong. I'm not proposing that God be postulated in public schools, but purposely omitting evidence contradicting natural selection to spoon-feed kids a more easily digestible concept of evolution is wrong.
Trivializing human evolution by attempting to explain it in an editorial notebook is a joke.
Michael Carlton
Junior
Political Science and Economics
