|
 |
William Paley Institute
for
Intelligent Design™ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Response of the Writing Committee to the Cover
Letter and Document Prepared by the Intelligent Design Network
Memo Dated January 30, 2001 to The KSBE
The Intelligent Design Network prepared a lengthy response to the
writing
committee's sixth draft of its science standards. Representatives of
the ID
Network submitted this document and a cover letter to the Board at
its January,
2001 meeting. The Board directed the writing committee to consider
the ID
Network's document in preparing its current draft (6.1) of science
standards.
The writing committee set the context for its response by quoting
from the
Intelligent Design Network's cover letter of January 5, 2001 to the
Kansas State
Board of Education:
"Our proposal is focused on one issue. It seeks only to stop the
teaching/preaching of naturalism to our children in the area of
origins
science - science that deals with the origin of the universe, of
life and its
diversity. As you know, Naturalism is a doctrine or belief that
states that
all phenomena result only from natural causes - chance and necessity
- and
that design inferences are invalid. It is not a proven theory. It is
a
philosophy."
Writing Committee's Response: Naturalism, as defined by the ID
network, is a
philosophy not a science. In contrast to naturalistic philosophy,
the proposed
draft six standards are about science. Written by Kansas'
scientists, educators,
and citizens, these standards do not foster teaching naturalistic
philosophy. In
the nature of science section, draft six describes the limits of
science:
"Science is the human activity of seeking natural explanations for
what we
observe in the world around us. Science does so through the use of
observation,
experimentation, and logical argument while maintaining strict
empirical
standards and healthy skepticism." This means that by its methods,
science
limits its investigations to the natural world. It does not propose
or even
suggest that ALL phenomena result from only natural causes. Draft
six does not
state, "Nature is all that is or was, or ever will be."
Consistent with the above response, science itself is limited to
natural
explanations. To open it on par with non-natural explanations would
erroneously
elevate the scope and importance of science. To adopt a science
definition not
anchored in the natural world would make these standards the first
to invite
non-science into the science classroom.
|
|
|
Promoting an
Understanding of the Intelligent Design of the Universe
|
|