Yesterday I presented this Tech Central Station column as food for thought on intelligent design. Tonight, I offer you this Tech Central Station article which is dismissive of design theories. Again, I leave it to you to make your own conclusions on this topic, but I must make note of something. Yesterday's column approached the topic with a very open mind as to the possibilities. To me, that is good science-after all, science is practice of explaining the unexplained, and in doing so a good scientist should be open to all possibilities, right? Tonight's article, on the other hand, seems dismissive and somewhat closed minded as to the possibilities. In fact, when looking at the two articles, the con-design article seems to be more an article of blind faith than the questioning piece from last night. Being that this is a micro-comparison, it is unfair to apply the observations to the macro argument, but my perception in this debate is that the evolution side of the argument has been much more close minded than the design side. That's just not good science. Debate, defend, but don't dismiss.
Personal background
Given my two posts on this, I feel I owe a little deeper background on, well, me. I was raised in a Church that believed in the literal interpretation of the Bible, i.e., the world was created in 7 human days. From that perspective, it is just as heretical for me to consider the combination of evolution and design a possibility as it apparently is for evolutionists to do likewise. But I'm still willing to consider it.
No comments:
Post a Comment