Thoughts on Intelligent Design

“Intelligent design” is merely a cleverly planned alternative name for creationism adopted by unyielding religious extremists because of its association less with religious fanaticism and mistakenly more with scholarly science in a despicable attempt to mask its religious affiliations, mislead the uninformed, and sneak it through the schoolhouse doors under the guise of factual science after creationism was barred from state-run academies due to the unconstitutionality of the marriage of church and state it fostered; the injection of religion into the United States’ curricula in the form of “intelligent design” is appalling not only in its promotion of the Christian religion in a country where state, and public schools by extension, have been pried from religion in scores of ferocious battles to uphold not only the inalienable right of religious freedom but also the freedom to not be subjected to religion which undoubtedly comes permanently glued to this Constitution-given right, but also in the ignorance it fosters by asking the United States’ youngest generation to rely not on falsifiable science and new revelations made possible by novel technology but on millennia-old theories written down in an unreliable book by sources who believed whole-heartedly in now-disproven theories such as the flat-earth theory and geocentricism, and in its endorsement of supernatural phenomena as science when it evidently lies outside of this realm and in that of theology by definition. In his essay “Face it: Intelligent design is more fraud than science,” Charles Krauthammer describes “intelligent design” as “a ‘theory’ that violates the most basic requirement of anything pretending to be science – that it be empirically disprovable….In order to justify the farce that intelligent design is science, Kansas had to corrupt the very definition of science....” The proponents of “intelligent design”’s emphasis on the validity of teaching it side-by-side evolution as an alternative comes from the idea that “intelligent design” is as much a science as evolution because neither can be explicitly proven; however, the validity of Krauthammer’s statement is undeniable. By the sanction of definition alone, “intelligent design” should be thrown from the science classroom; “intelligent design” addresses supernatural forces, removed from science by the fact that they cannot be disproven – while a god may indeed have begun human life, just as an invisible pink elephant may be living on the shoulders of each earthling, forming the illusion known as gravity, neither idea has a place in the science classroom as each fails to pass the simplest test: being falsifiable. In another essay on the validity and veracity of “intelligent design” entitled “Why Darwin’s still a scientific hotshot,” James D. Watson explains, “One of the greatest gifts science has brought to the world is continuing elimination of the supernatural…knowledge liberates mankind from superstition…with increasing knowledge, the intellectual darkness that surrounds us is illuminated and we learn more of the beauty and wonder of the natural world.” This illumination has already occurred scores of previous times, disproving divine theories which had been held for millennia before being invalidated by then-novel theories which threatened the church’s power and were therefore fiercely opposed by the institution; now the church stands in the same stance it took when Copernicus and Galileo Galilei threatened to dislodge the church from power with the heliocentric theory, a now universally accepted truth, and, yet again, it blocks the advancement of knowledge and promotes ignorance by encouraging the disposal of new ideas in favor of those found in an ancient scripture which has already been disproven numerous times in a last attempt not to be deprived of its final foothold. Centuries from now, Earth’s inhabitants will gaze back in amusement at their ignorant ancestors who attempted to buddy the teaching of evolution with their myths on creation, as we now look back and wonder how our ancestors lacked the intelligence to realize that Helios in his golden chariot was pure fiction, not fit for the classroom. As can be concluded from the Pew Research Center’s chart “Views on Evolution,” views on creationism and “intelligent design” correlate strongly and undeniably with religion: while 70% of white Evangelicals believed life on Earth have existed solely in their present form, 71% of secular interviewees believed in some form of evolution, with over 50% of both white Mainline Christians and white Catholics believing in either “intelligent design” or creationism. The strong correlation between personal religion and personal views comes into extreme significance as “intelligent design” is thrown through the schoolhouse doors; while evolution is a falsifiable, secular theory, “intelligent design” is a component of the Christian faith. As residents of the United States of America have the freedom to choose their own religion and, therefore, the freedom to choose not to follow a religion, “intelligent design” has as much place in the science classroom as Noah’s flood in the history class, the Flying Spaghetti Monster in the Home-Economics classroom, or a required prayer period in the school – imposing a religious matter such as “intelligent design” on students breaks not only freedom of religion and separation of church and state but moral barriers as insertion of fanatical ideas into a required education approaches brainwashing. Teaching Christian-based “intelligent design” in public schools defies the principles America’s foundation lies on – forcing religion into a mandated education will demolish America’s moral foundation and replace it with that of a theocracy; should “intelligent design” be taught in schools, it is only the first step in the inevitable road to religious favoritism and, eventually, religious persecution.