Access Research NetworkA measure now in the Missouri Legislature would require schools to acknowledge the dispute.
The core of Charles Darwin's theory of evolution is that the design we intuitively observe in natural phenomena is just an illusion. His position is that mechanistic natural processes, such as random mutation and natural selection, account for all the biological complexity in the world.
A growing number of credentialed and credible scientists are disagreeing with that notion as modern technology reveals levels of complexity that are truly astonishing. They argue that natural processes alone cannot account for both the origin of life and the origin of many seemingly irreducible complex biosystems. Rather, some form of intelligence must be responsible for the sophistication of biological information processing systems that our own intelligence has yet to even understand.
Missouri House Bill 911, which I recently filed, would enact a program ensuring that students would be told about this scientific disagreement with Darwin. Ordinarily, this should not be necessary. However, educational institutions are urging both public and private schools to officially suppress the disagreement.
If such suppression were based on an objective analysis of the claim, I might agree. But that is not the case. It appears that the theory of intelligent design is being suppressed because of a little known rule barring consideration of any explanation related to intelligent design. The rule is referred to as methodological naturalism, and it allows consideration of only naturalistic explanations for the origins and development of life.
Use of the rule by our public education system would seem to guarantee that Darwin's claim will be taught as fact or ideology, not merely as a theory. If Darwin's explanation were truly theoretical, the disagreement could be heard. But students are not even allowed to hear legitimate criticisms of Darwin's claim, even when intelligent design is left out of the discussion.
Because ideas about the origin of life and its diversity unavoidably affect our views of the world in which we live, I think we need to eliminate official suppression of scientific evidence of intelligent design simply because it tends to support theistic views. A system that only shows students evidence that supports a naturalistic world view will effectively indoctrinate them in a nontheistic ideology and not truly inform them about the raging scientific controversy. A system that seeks to truly inform students about evolution should encourage them to understand both sides of the debate.
I have received many thoughtful comments and criticisms of the proposed legislation. I expect these will be given due consideration as the bill is processed in the normal course of legislation.
Dr. Robert Wayne Cooper of Camdenton, a practicing physician, represents the 155th district in the Missouri House. He also is president of Graceland Ministries, Inc.
File Date: 2.3.04
This data file may be reproduced in its entirety
for non-commercial use.
A return link to the Access Research Network web site would be
appreciated.
Documents on this site which have been reproduced from a previous publication are copyrighted through the individual publication. See the body of the above document for specific copyright information.