http://agylen.com/2005/08/12/irrationality-rules/ Ugo Cei's Weblog Sun, 20 Jul 2008 04:18:00 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 http://agylen.com/2005/08/12/irrationality-rules/#comment-205 ugo Fri, 12 Aug 2005 21:12:37 +0000 http://agylen.com/2005/08/12/irrationality-rules/#comment-205 It might be excessive, but please forgive me some amount of rhetorical exaggeration. If it were enough to say that ID isn't science and shouldn't be taught as such, we wouldn't have rulings like the Kansas one. It might be excessive, but please forgive me some amount of rhetorical exaggeration. If it were enough to say that ID isn’t science and shouldn’t be taught as such, we wouldn’t have rulings like the Kansas one.

]]> http://agylen.com/2005/08/12/irrationality-rules/#comment-204 jaaron Fri, 12 Aug 2005 18:17:51 +0000 http://agylen.com/2005/08/12/irrationality-rules/#comment-204 Your assertion that "You cannot have graduates who are smart, educated and believe in ID at the same time" is false. I suppose this depends on your definition of "smart" and "educated" but if you intend to restrict those terms to only those who hold no irrational, false, or unproven beliefs true, then you will by definition exclude everyone from such traits. The conditions of "accepting ID" and "being smart and educated" are not mutually exclusive. One could perhaps be smarter and more educated by seeing ID for what it really is, but your initial statement is a bit excessive and, like ID, isn't backed up by any research. Why don't we just leave it to the facts? ID isn't science and shouldn't be taught as such. 'nuff said. Your assertion that “You cannot have graduates who are smart, educated and believe in ID at the same time” is false. I suppose this depends on your definition of “smart” and “educated” but if you intend to restrict those terms to only those who hold no irrational, false, or unproven beliefs true, then you will by definition exclude everyone from such traits. The conditions of “accepting ID” and “being smart and educated” are not mutually exclusive. One could perhaps be smarter and more educated by seeing ID for what it really is, but your initial statement is a bit excessive and, like ID, isn’t backed up by any research. Why don’t we just leave it to the facts? ID isn’t science and shouldn’t be taught as such. ’nuff said.

]]>