A public debate has intensified in the U.S in recent months as to whether a new theory known as ‘intelligent design’ should be taught in the classroom.
The theory claims that life is too complex to be explained simply by the standard evolution theory, and that an unseen creator or power had a role in bringing about creation as it today.
Intelligent design has become increasingly popular among Christian circles, despite differing from biblical creationism in that it does not take a literal interpretation of the Book of Genesis.
President George Bush has spurred on the debate after coming out in public support of the theory, fuelling tensions over the perceived growth of the religious right.
President Bush told reporters in Texas that children should be taught about intelligent design so that they can better understand the debate about the origins of the universe.
Even members of the religious right are, however, reluctant to endorse the theory. Republican Senator Rick Santorum said: “I’m not comfortable with intelligent design being taught in the science classroom.
“What we should be teaching are the problems and holes, and I think there are legitimate problems and holes in the theory of evolution.”
Numerous scientists have also spoken out against intelligent design, stressing that it is nothing more than a theory.
Chief executive of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Alan Leshner, says that the supporters of intelligent design are simply “trying to cloak a religious concept in the mantle of science.”
He said: “There is no science to intelligent design, it’s not even a scientifically answerable question.”
Executive Director of the National Jewish Democratic Council Ira N. Forman also rejected the introduction of intelligent design to the public school science classroom: “Public school science classes should teach just that: science. There is a time and place to teach religion to our children – either at home, or in private or religious schools, or after the public school day and on weekends in our houses of worship.”
Associate director of the Centre for Science and Culture at Discovery Institute, John G. West, said, however, that intelligent design and its supporters were sorely misunderstood.
He said: “The first misunderstanding is that intelligent design is based on religion rather than science. Design theory is a scientific inference based on empirical evidence, not religious, texts.
“The theory proposes that some features of the natural world are best explained as the product of an intelligent cause as opposed to an undirected process such as natural selection.”
Mr West also defended the move by numerous education boards, including Kansas, Ohio, Minnesota and New Mexico, that have considered incorporating the theory into science teaching as attempting not so much to enforce the theory but rather to teach “the weaknesses as well as strengths of modern Darwinian theory.”
President Bush defended the teaching of intelligent design in science lessons, however, saying, “I think that part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought...You’re asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, the answer is yes.”
