Re: [METAVIEWS] 008: The Big Tent and the Camel's Nose,by Eugenie Scott

From: Dawsonzhu@aol.com
Date: Fri Feb 16 2001 - 09:38:28 EST

  • Next message: george murphy: "Re: Evidence and proof; was More on Gosse's OMPHALOS"

    in a post by Ted Davis (also Dick Fischer) Eugenie Scott is
    quoted as saying:

    << I said (and have said repeatedly) that the message of ID is
     "evolution is bad science", without providing an alternative view of
     the history of the universe. >>

    I think this is really E. Scott's core point. It is not
    enough to simply discredit a theory. All theories have
    problems at some level: that is why they are called
    "theories" not "facts". What Scott is challenging ID to do
    is to propose a theory. If the theory presented by ID works
    better than the current standard, then so be it.

    That is obviously easier said than done. To develop
    an alternative theory takes some serious effort. However,
    it is also true that a theory that works eventually shows
    that it has a superior predictive capacity over its rivals.
    Moreover, even when a theory meets with fierce resistance,
    it's truth is what eventually silences the opposition.

    So, at least for doing (and particularly teaching) science,
    she is saying is that we need a model from ID.

    Ted Davis also commented:
    <<
    My own view on this is somewhere in between Bill Dembski and
    Genie Scott: I think that teachers at all levels (K-12 and university)
    should be encouraged to "teach the controversy" about evolution as part of
    science classes (not social studies, e.g.), since science isn't absolute
    truth and isn't disconnected from other currents of thinking.
    >>

    I think at least in principle, I can agree with you here. The
    only problem I have is in how to apply this. Some high schools
    hardly have qualified teachers to teach biology (or any other
    science for that matter). The role of the teacher here would
    be to get the students to give consideration to alternative
    views, to investigate the issues for themselves, and to arrive
    at *their own* conclusions. Not all high school students are
    at the same level a maturity, nor are all parents particularly
    responsible in their own role as mentors and guides. As a result,
    the ideal, which is probably good when done well, seems rather
    difficult to implement in practice.

    By Grace alone do we proceed,
    Wayne



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 16 2001 - 09:38:42 EST