Intelligent Design

Intelligent Design - THE (VERY MINIMAL) PLACE OF...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
THE (VERY MINIMAL) PLACE OF INTELLIGENT DESIGN IN THE CURRICULUM: A REPLY TO JOHN ANGUS CAMPBELL LARRY LEE BLACKMAN, PROFESSOR OF PHILOSOPHY STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT GENESEO (585) 245-5231 BLACKMAL@GENESEO.EDU A draft of this paper was read on April 21, 2006, for the Philosophy Club of the State University of New York at Geneseo.
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
THE (VERY MINIMAL) PLACE OF INTELLIGENT DESIGN IN THE CURRICULUM: A REPLY TO JOHN ANGUS CAMPBELL John Angus Campbell, Professor of Communication at the University of Memphis, recommends "teaching the controversy" of intelligent design ("ID") vs. "Darwinism" in public schools. In 2003 he co-edited an anthology, Darwinism, Design, and Public Education , promoting such a curricular revision. Campbell contributed the book's preface, "Why Are We Still Debating Darwin? Why Not Teach the Controversy?" as well as its seminal article, "Intelligent Design, Darwinism, and the Philosophy of Public Education." 1 Since ID and Darwin's theory stand in opposition to one another, he thinks, both should be taught in biology classes. The idea of "teaching the controversy" enjoys widespread support. In a meeting with reporters in August, 2005, President George W. Bush weighed in, asserting: Both sides ought to be properly taught . . . so people can understand what the debate is about . . . . Part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought . . . . You're asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, and the answer is yes. 2 Also, in comments published in 2004 in Science , Bush said that "scientific critiques of any theory should be a normal part of the science education." 3 Furthermore, during a trial in the fall, 2005, pitting Tammy Kitzmiller et. al. versus the Dover, Pennsylvania, School District, et. al ., Board President Sheila Harkins explained why she had voted in favor of a proposal requiring students to be made aware of "other theories" of evolution: "I thought, 'this is another way to make them think.' . . . If you're going to say 'other theories,' then you need to have an example of what 'other theories' is." 4 Also noteworthy is a poll conducted July 7-17, 2005, by Princeton Survey Research Associates International indicating that 64% of Americans are "open to the idea of teaching creationism along with evolution in the public schools," 5 and, as will shortly be made clear, ID is a more 1 John Angus Campbell, "Why Are We Still Debating Darwinism? Why Not Teach the Controversy?" in Darwinism, Design, and Public Education , ed. John Angus Campbell and Stephen C. Meyer (East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University Press, 2003), xi-xxxviii, and John Angus Campbell, "Intelligent Design, Darwinism, and the Philosophy of Public Education," in Darwinism, Design, and Public Education , ed, John Angus Campbell and Stephen C. Meyer (East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University Press, 2003), 3-44. Cf. John Angus Campbell, Review of Michael Ruse, But Is It Science? The Philosophical Question in the Evolution/Creation Controversy,
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 21

Intelligent Design - THE (VERY MINIMAL) PLACE OF...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online