Arguing from the Evidence: The Correct Approach to Intelligent Design’s Challenge in the U.S. Courts.

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
  • Author(s): Thomasson, Brian A.
  • Source:
    Philosophy of the Social Sciences. Dec2011, Vol. 41 Issue 4, p495-534. 40p.
  • Additional Information
    • Subject Terms:
    • Abstract:
      In Kitzmiller v. Dover (2005), the only U.S. federal case on teaching Intelligent Design in public schools, the plaintiffs used the same argument as in the creation-science trials of the 1980s: Intelligent Design is religion, not science, because it invokes the supernatural; thus teaching it violates the Constitution. Although the plaintiffs won, this strategy is unwise because it is based on problematic definitions of religion and science, leads to multiple truths in society, and is unlikely to succeed before the present right-leaning Supreme Court. I suggest discarding past approaches in favor of arguing solely from the evidence for evolution. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]
    • Abstract:
      Copyright of Philosophy of the Social Sciences is the property of Sage Publications Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)