A lawsuit in Pennsylvania about the evolution alternative Intelligent Design may reevaluate how students all over the country are taught the origins of life, but the state Board of Education said ID will not become a part of public education in Massachusetts.
Parents in Dover, Pa. sued the town school board over a recent addition to the ninth grade science curriculum that refers to evolution as a theory, not a fact. The school board decided to teach Intelligent Design as a valid scientific alternative to evolution, according the Associated Press.
Intelligent Design relies on the fact that nature is simply too complex to be the work of anything other than some greater power, according to Dennis Wagner, executive director of Access Research Network, a non-profit science and technology organization that researches with an Intelligent Design perspective.
Wagner emphasized a difference between Creationism and Intelligent Design.
“Scientific Creationism is more based on a strict biblical view,” Wagner said. “Intelligent Design may have some things in common, but has a simpler assumption. ID looks for the same principles and applies them to biology and astronomy.”
Wagner compared the new concept to archaeology.
“When an archaeologist finds an artifact, he has to make a decision,” he said. “Was it formed by human intelligence, or through scientific processes?”
Wagner emphasized that he is in favor of academic freedom to teach new concepts, not mandates. He expressed concern for writers, such as Richard Sternberg, who worked at the Smithsonian Institute and was removed from his editor position for publishing an article about Intelligent Design.
“There are few published articles,” Wagner said. “But when people try to get the information published, careers are lost over it.”
Boston University professors of science and theology debated whether a science class is the right place for teaching Intelligent Design.
Wesley Wildman, associate professor of theology and ethics, said Intelligent Design is not a scientific theory and should not be taught in science classes.
“The most credible version of ID accepts micro-evolutionary processes within a given species but postulates that evolution can’t explain the development of one species from another,” Wildman said. “This is not a testable scientific idea, but it is a meaningful philosophical interpretation of nature.”
Biology professor John Finnerty also said ID does not belong in a science class, except to point out that there is no evidence to support it.
“Life appears so complex, that it must have been designed,” Finnerty said.
The professors agreed that the Pennsylvania lawsuit should go forward. Douglas Yeo, a teaching associate at Boston University, said education should provide for open debate.
“Many object to Intelligent Design as being little more than an attempt to bring religion to the classroom,” Yeo said. “But honest thinkers understand that accepting evolution as fact requires an act of faith as well.
“When an idea such as Intelligent Design is summarily dismissed by the academy for political reasons, it may tell us more about those who would work to keep students from considering multiple points of views than those who advocate an open debate on important but unsettled issues,” he continued.
Organizations such as the National Center for Science Education have been tracking anti-evolution cases for 25 years, according to spokeswoman Susan Spath.
Scientists at NCSE provide scientific expertise on the legal history of the evolution versus creationism debate and how it has been handled in the past, according to the company’s website.
Spath said if the judge rules in favor of ID in Pennsylvania, the decision will have strong effects on education in the U.S.
“The decision will be important; if it permits ID, it will be popping up like crazy,” Spath said.
NCSE is following the Dover case, as well as the issue of ID in other parts of the U.S.
“New England is the one part of the country where there is not a lot of trouble with this,” Spath said.
Jonathan Palumbo, spokesman for the Massachusetts Board of Education, verified that the potential of Intelligent Design being taught in Boston in schools is not an issue.
“We’ve got gay marriage here; that is our issue,” Palumbo said.
This is an account occasionally used by the Daily Free Press editors to post archived posts from previous iterations of the site or otherwise for special circumstance publications. See authorship info on the byline at the top of the page.
