>I agree here - > >"From a purely objective perspective I don't really think that ID >proponents should be able to have things both ways here." >But if you don't allow it in philosophy class, then ID proponents don't have >it at all, and then the opponents have it both ways. > >Proponents want it in science class, but opponents won't let them. So they >put it in philosophy class and you object? I don't get the thinking here.
So are the proponents backing off their claim that it's science? If so, then fine. If not (and I see no indication that they are) then it doesn't matter what you call the class if what you're teaching is presented as science. It seems to me to be a syntactic, not actual, change - a "wink, wink, nudge, nudge" in the direction of opponents which actually says "we know it's science but this is the only way they'll let you students have the truth!" And that's just more misdirection and misinformation. I can't say for certain in this case: I've not seen the ciricula. But considering ID's other initiative's then I wouldn't be at all suprised at the latter. Jim Davis ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:191983 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
