Essay on Should Intelligent Design be Taught in Public Schools?

Despite the court loss, it seems that attitudes have barely changed among even Louisiana teachers. Aguillard also noted the level of higher education teachers had in relation to how much they taught evolution. “The quantitative data show that teachers holding greater than a Bachelor's degree allocate more time to evolutionary theory than do teachers possessing only a Bachelor's degree.” (Aguillard 1999, pg. 184) In the general public, attitudes have also stagnated.

Creationism has long been ruled out of public education and science. Creationists reject most of modern science in favor of a literal reading of the Bible. They believe that the Earth is less than 10,000 years old and God created everything fully formed (including humans). People in opposition against Intelligent Design think that in the eyes of creationists, the so called “intelligent designer” is God. Meanwhile, Darwin's Theory of Evolution is the widely held notion that all life is related and has descended from a common ancestor. Once Darwin had proposed that the natural processes could have produced every species on this planet, including humans, the creationists felt that this theory took God out of the picture. Centuries later, like many people in Dover, many people in the US agree. Somewhere between a third and half the US population doesn’t accept

Evolution has a long history of being debated as inappropriate to be taught in schools. Many people feel that it is important to learn about Charles Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, but at the same time there are many who refuse to learn about it. In the Scopes Monkey Trial and in the movie Inherit the Wind a trial is going on debating the legality of teaching evolution. Though there are still issues that arise with teaching evolution it is currently accepted more than it is debated against. Evolution is a scientifically tested and proven concept and should be taught in science classes.

The debate over teaching evolution in public schools is not new at all but the debate has been elevated through the media over the past few years. Conservative Christians and other conservatives serving on school boards (particularly in the South) have been insisting that if schools are going to buy textbooks that have evolution chapters then they should also have a place in that textbook near the evolution chapter for creationism. Progressives and scholars that understand the scientific basis for evolution argue that there's nothing wrong with putting creationism or "intelligent design" in textbooks but that subject is not science-based and therefore should be published in the "religion" chapter (if there is one). Should evolution be taught in public schools? The answer is yes, most certainly; to ignore evolution is to deprive public school students of some of the most important knowledge relating to our planet and our society. Scientific ignorance is unacceptable in a country that calls itself the "greatest nation on earth."

It would be an understatement to claim that the realms of faith and reason rarely conflict. Since the earliest days of scientific inquiry, these two spheres of thought have been locked in a vicious battle, only letting up as religion has gradually modernized to accommodate newer understandings of the universe. But, as is the nature of any age-old debate, the fires fueling this conflict have once again been fed, this time with the controversy surrounding the teaching of Intelligent Design in public schools. The proponents of this alternative “theory” to the origins of life claim that they have been silenced by the Darwinian establishment and support integrating their ideas into the classroom through such means as textbook disclaimers or

One way to address the question is whether or not creationism, in itself, is a valid idea to be taught in public schools. The answer to this can be yes. Not only should a student in American public schools learn

With the rise of modern science over the centuries came a vigorous attack on Christian theology; most universally recognized is Darwin’s theory of evolution. Although it has been taught throughout schools across the country since the 1960’s, recent legislature entitled “academic freedom” bills has encouraged skepticism of Darwin’s theory due to the inherent contradictions of it. Still, some people challenge Christianity on the basis of a lack of evidence, yet they’ll turn to theories of evolution which lack empirical support without enquiry.

The late Stephen Jay Gould, a noted paleontologist who once described himself as an “agnostic leaning towards atheism,” wrote the classic treatise Evolution as Fact and Theory for Discover magazine back in 1981. His distinguished career and scientific achievements did earn him respect amongst his peers, but to the general public he is best known for his popular science writings and, to smaller circles, as a champion of evolution. As his treatise was written for a non-academic, science themed magazine, a basic understanding of science, and specifically evolutionary mechanics, was assumed of his audience. The treatise itself is on the often overlapping distinction between “theory” and “fact”; two words, he asserts, that creationists

The theory of creationism versus the theory of evolution is a controversial topic worldwide. The topic delves further into whether creationism should or should not be taught in public schools. While evolution is a theory that says modern plants and animals evolved by a natural process over time, creationism is the belief that the universe and living organisms originated from specific acts of divine creation. Because evolution and creationism are both theories, creationism should be taught with as much validity as the teaching of evolution in public school. Since the early 1990’s creationism has become more and more a plausible theory. The historical events of creationism dates back all the way to the creation of mankind and the universe. Various evidence, such as the universe, point towards an intelligent designer and should therefore be taught in public schools.

Despite great efforts to convince the opposing side, a battle still brews amongst creationists and evolutionists over the beginning of life and the universe, but neither opinions’ palpability can be firmly upheld through scientific manners. Since science can only prove hypotheses that are testable and based on current observations, neither creation nor evolutionary concepts can be proven with irrefutable evidence. However, regardless of the inability to prove either concept, most public school systems promote evolution as a scientific fact. Many students who lack firm beliefs about the origin of life believe what they are taught without giving any personal thought to the matter. Instead of robotically absorbing biased information,

Evolution has been taught in all public schools for as long as many can recall. Though the process of evolution is not the only theory, schools have been teaching it as if it is the complete truth, ignoring other aspects and only focusing and targeting on Darwin's theory of Evolution. However, there are still many other ideas that the students should be informed of as well because all are theories, all are hypothetic. Teaching of the evolution theory have yet to be proven reliable and confirmed by all scientists, thus it should not be taught in schools and should be left for students to wonder and discover by themselves.

There is a major controversy brewing in the educational field today. Scientist, teachers, professors, and many others are debating where the world and its habitats originally came from. This is the debate of Intelligent Design (ID) and Evolution. The main debating question of many scholars being, "Is the universe self-contained or does it require something beyond itself to explain its existence and internal function?".

In the history of science vs. religion there have been no issues more intensely debated than evolution vs. creationism. The issue is passionately debated since the majority of evidence is in favor of evolution, but the creation point of view can never be proved wrong because of religious belief. Human creation breaks down into three simple beliefs; creation theory, naturalistic evolution theory, and theistic evolution theory. The complexities of all three sides create a dilemma for what theory to support among all people, religious and non-religious.

Public schools are a place to learn proven facts and some very well—known and accepted theories. These schools have been led this way for a long time and show no signs of changing. Many states around the country have rejected the teaching of creationism in public schools, since the subject is so controversial among teachers and parents. In Ohio, a bill to develop new science content standards was not successfully passed. Many creationists were upset when they discovered that the first drafts of the standards were filled with evolutionary content, without any allowance for alternative explanations of life’s origins. In the uproar, the state board held a special meeting to investigate the process that the writing team and advisory committee used to draft the science standards (Matthews, Answering Genesis). This is why learning the facts about evolution should be taught at school. By doing this, there would be much less confrontation between teachers, students, and parents. If one has the desire to learn about creationism or any other beliefs of how the world came to be, one should learn it at a place outside of school, such as church or at home.

In 1859, Charles Darwin published On the Origin of Species, introducing the theory of evolution. One hundred and fifty-six years later, scientists still accept this senseless philosophy. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay states, “Our school systems teach the children that they are nothing but glorified apes who are evolutionized out of some primordial soup” (Snyder). Schools worldwide have presented exactly this to the young, impressionable minds of your future doctors, engineers, scientists, and presidents. They assure us that if we give a small amount of mud enough time it can, by itself, bring about the art of da Vinci, the plays of Shakespeare, the music of Mozart, and the brilliant mind of Einstein.