by James D. Bentham

Created on: March 10, 2009

Intelligent Design should be taught in public school - of course it should be. It can be taught in a class on world religions and myths, or it can be broached in science classes, as the discredited hypothesis of spontaneous generation is. The creation myth has value in the context of science, as it shows people what science is not. The world isn't flat, the sun doesn't revolve around the earth, maggots don't arise magically from non-living matter, and species are not created as-is by a deity.

Creationists insist that their religious belief be taught in schools, likely expecting more converts, but they're trying to bite off more than they'll be able to chew. Creationism wouldn't be an alternative to the theory of evolution, as it isn't a scientific theory; but it would serve as something to compare evolution to, a juxtaposition of hypothesis and actual theory. Science deals with observable, testable phenomenon, and because creationism deals with the supernatural, the clear contrast would only help students understand the scientific method. This would be counterproductive to religious indoctrination.

Instead of gaining respect for their baseless proposition, creation advocates would see their idea taken out of its protective bubble, and thrown into the merciless world of science, where nothing is sacred but dissected. Worse yet, a rudimentary analysis of the creation hypothesis would demonstrate that the belief in creation is contradictory, self-refuting: If we must accept that things are too complex to have evolved, and that they must therefore have a creator, then this logic would also have apply to the creator, and his creator, and his, and so on. Creationists don't want to go that far, however, because they're only trying to endorse the one creator. Allowing creationism in science classrooms would only make it vulnerable to ridicule. Intelligent Design advocates thrive on its exclusion from science class; without the mystique, it'll just be another casualty of science.

Sure, teach creation in schools, teach about maggots from dead meat, teach about the flat earth, and about the sun revolving around our planet. These failed hypotheses pose a great contrast to theories born of the scientific method, they're excellent for helping students discern what is based on fact and what is based on ignorance. Scientific theories explain facts, they impart knowledge and have practical applications; creationism doesn't fit into that paradigm. Creationists are better off keeping their idea holy, safe from their opponents who would only discuss it with impunity. Careful what you wish for.

Learn more about this author, James D. Bentham.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.