Quote (catkaboodle @ 12 Apr 2012 11:36)
To clarify, this clause that I've been talking about would be one line that would be used ONCE before the class started on evolution. Just once.
Honestly, I think the disciplines should be more interrelated than they are now. While I don't think we should be learning everything about literature in science or something, I do think it can be appropriate to teach the histories of theories sometimes. In my view, the sentences I'm advocating would be something along those lines.
The sentences you're advocating can be arrived at without putting them in science class. Any religious person in the science class would try and reconcile their beliefs with that kind of logic without prompting. Even the Pope has.
What it comes down to is: Science class teaches empiricism:
"Empiricism in the philosophy of science emphasizes evidence, especially as discovered in experiments. It is a fundamental part of the scientific method that all hypotheses and theories must be tested against observations of the natural world rather than resting solely on a priori reasoning, intuition, or revelation."
Intelligent design is not supported by the evidence. It is taken on faith in God (find an atheist ID proponent). Faith is a rejection of empiricism.
Empiricism and faith, as two methods of arriving at truth, are incompatible. Scientific beliefs and religious beliefs CAN coexist where they don't conflict, but the basis for those beliefs fundamentally CANNOT. Which is why intelligent design, and other religious theories, cannot be covered in a science classroom unless they conform to the same rigorous standard of science as any other theory. ID does not belong in the science classroom any more than atheist philosophy belongs in a church sermon. Could you imagine a pastor starting every sermon with a disclaimer along the lines of: "Well, some people don't believe that faith is a good method for arriving at truth so they think this is all rubbish. Bear this in mind."
Notice everything I said is independent of the truth of ID, or the validity of fideism vs empiricism. They just fundamentally don't belong together.