Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mcvax!ukc!cs.tcd.ie!tcdmath!ftoomey
From: ftoomey@maths.tcd.ie (Fergal Toomey)
Newsgroups: sci.bio
Subject: Re: Creationism in our schools and the Anti-Dogma statement
Message-ID: <206@maths.tcd.ie>
Date: 11 Jan 89 11:58:57 GMT
References: <8558@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> <2630002@hpcilzb.HP.COM> <13338@cup.portal.com>
Reply-To: ftoomey@maths.tcd.ie (Fergal Toomey)
Organization: Maths Dept., Trinity College, Dublin
Lines: 14


The way I see it, the difference between Creationism and Darwinism is
essentially the difference between pseudo-science and science. The nature
of this difference has been hotly disputed for years among scientific
philosophers and no entirely satisfactory method of distinguishing between
the two has yet been proposed. Just what is so scientific about Darwinism
and so unscientific about Creationism? To date, nobody has managed to pin
down this difference (if it exists).
However, in my opinion, this doesnt mean that Creationism should be taught
as science. The proper place for Creationism is in a religion class. If you
insist that Creationism is science, then why not call religion classes
'alternative science' classes? I don't see how anyone could obbject to that.

                          Fergal Toomey, TCD.