Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

[Phys-L] Re: ID and string theory



----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Green" <JMGreen@SISNA.COM>
To: <PHYS-L@LISTS.NAU.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 3:41 PM
Subject: Re: ID and string theory


I see no problem with teaching string theory as long as you don't assert
its
"correctness". There's nothing wrong with extrapolating and coming up
with
new ideas and theories so long as you don't confuse them with "fact".

And what about those who would say something like the following:

I see no problem with teaching ID as long as you don't assert its
"correctness". There's nothing wrong with extrapolating and coming up
with
new ideas and theories so long as you don't confuse them with "fact".

I personally see two problems with the first sentence. Firstly, ID is not
science in the sense that I define science, and has no place in a science
curriculum (Nor, imo, do assertions that strongly suggest that Devine
Creation is "false" belong in science). The second problem is that we have
mandated separation of Church and State, so issues like this don't belong in
school as school-sponsored activities. I repeat that this would not be
nearly so big an issue as it has become if it were not for the fact that
many Christians feel that their beliefs are under attack through
ill-conceived or intentional equating of science with infallibility coupled
with careless, and perhaps insensitive, wording that leads them to the
conclusion that they need equal time in school to counter what they see as
this attack. It is all so easily avoidable!

As to the second sentence, this what science does all the time, and I don't
think there is anything wrong with that point of view. I beleive that we're
just a little cavalier about our assumption that non-science people
understand that "theory" does not strictly equate to "fact" or "proof" (and
frankly, some of us seem to forget that little detail at times).