![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
poliphiloI've been on a message board where Darwinists and Creationists were slugging it out. Ouch, ouch, ouch!
Such dogmatism- on both sides. But, as one of the posters pointed out, Darwinism is a scientific theory and Intelligent Design is a philosophical theory. They belong in different disciplines.
It's as if one team turned up for the match in football strip and the other team in cricket whites.
Such dogmatism- on both sides. But, as one of the posters pointed out, Darwinism is a scientific theory and Intelligent Design is a philosophical theory. They belong in different disciplines.
It's as if one team turned up for the match in football strip and the other team in cricket whites.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-12-13 06:17 pm (UTC)their theory isn't.
I refuse to use the term "theory" in relation to Intelligent Design.
There are two meanings of the word theory. In casual lay terms, it usually means an idea or hunch. ("I have a theory that her husband is cheating on her.") But in scientific terms, a theory is an idea that has been tested repeatedly and stood up to a great deal of scrutiny.
The Intelligent Designers are trying to speak in scientific terms in order to give themselves credibility. If they want to play in the scientific arena, then they need to play by scientific rules. And scientifically speaking, ID is *not* in any way a theory.
no subject
Date: 2006-12-14 11:03 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-14 08:49 pm (UTC)