We disagree with her stance.

Tilghman explains her stance by taking issue with the fact that proponents of intelligent design are challenging what is widely considered a "scientific fact", one that has been "tested and challenged for 150 years". However, she fails to recognize and acknowledge the fact that as with the concept of intelligent design, the origins of the theory of evolution was that of an idea conceived by man. This may be a theory that holds up to scrutiny, but that does not necessarily mean that it will hold forever.

In possessing such an extreme viewpoint, Tilghman neglects to acknowledge, too, that the two theories could actually be complements of each other. The theories in contention. in fact, postulate about different aspects of the origin of life. The theory of intelligent design puts forth the idea of a supernatural being who created a form of life while Darwinism involves the evolution of species through mutations in genes from a single cell. This would mean that intelligent design could actually occur before evolution, since the theory of evolution never advanced any hypothesis as to where that single cell originated from.

Thus, we feel that by teaching ID, teachers do not undermine science as the theory of ID seems to be valid by logic, and there are obvious loopholes in the argument for Darwinism as stated before. Teaching of alternate viewpoints will serve to create an environment where open discussion and debates can take place, thus fuelling the students' self-driven learning. This would also allow the students to understand that the laws of science are not permanent, and can be disproved.

bertrand mingmei yixin yuanning 09s06h