Judgement Day: Intelligent Design On Trial Dissertation Example

Free Judgement Day: Intelligent Design On Trial Dissertation Example

Name Professor Course Date Judgement Day: Intelligent Design on Trial Summary The community of Dover split over the belief in Darwin’s theory and religion. Alan Bonsell and like-minded board members of Dover high school felt that it was wrong for evolution to be taught as the only explanation for life as it exists. A clause was introduced stating that the evolution theory had gaps and students could choose to find the explanation in the intelligence theory (Davis et al. 5). The science teachers, some parents, and students did not agree with this clause. According to them, the intelligence theory was a disguise of religion. Several parents filed a case against the school board to stop the teaching of the intelligent design in the science curriculum. The plaintiffs had to prove that religion was the motivation towards the introduction of the clause and that Intelligence design did not qualify to be a science (Davis et al. 5). According to the video, Ken R. Miller explained the formation a new species from a different one and how modern genetics and molecular genetics support the evolution theory. From the video, Scott states that that science has to be tested. According to her, Intelligence theory fails to explain the natural world. It fails to explain what the designer did, what the designer used to design living organisms, when and for what purpose. Evidence brought by the plaintiff showed that the intelligent design was initially based on creationism. The judge ruled that the intelligent design is not a science, is grounded on religion and is unconstitutional to teach in schools. Personal reflection. In my opinion, the intelligent design is not a scientific theory. The theory is based on religion and should not be presented as experimental. Darwin’s theory gives logic to how living things have developed over millions of years but fails to explain how the first living thing came to be. I believe that the evolution theory should be open to criticism...