There's alot of talk over this idea of Intelligent Design being taught in public schools as a counter-theory to Evolution. A big argument I've been hearing in support of it is that it doesn't have to be taught in Science class, oppossing evolution, but why not in a philosophy class?
I think it's simple. If philosophy was required in public school (and it isn't) would they teach religion? Would they teach Christianity and Jesus, Muslim and Mohammed, Confucism and Cunfucious? Or would they teach Nietzsche, Khant, Locke, Hobbes, Aristotle, DeCartes, and Hughes?
And then if Religion doesn't belong in a philsophy class, would you expect public schools to require a religion class? Would you expect the class to teach any Truth, or would they simply teach oppossing historical myths that attempt to explain the unexplainable without concrete evidence, but instead relying on the rawest, purest form of blind belief known as Faith?
I think we all can agree that Intelligent Design is a good idea. But it is no science. And in the public school institution there is no place where it can be taught. It isn't a well enough established, adhered, or even legitimately published scientific theory. Show me a science article, .PDF, periodical, anything, that provides a foundation for the development and discovery of concrete scientific evidence proving that some Being created everything.
It cannot go into a philosophy class because religion and philosophy are as polar opossites as religion and science. Philosophy uses the tools of reason, logic, and argumentation (that's for you Chucky-Poo) to discover Truth about human behavior while religion uses the occurrence of miracles, the existence of prophets, divine intervention, and a belief in that which cannot be seen or -- by very definition -- proven to explain the enigmas of this world.
Intelliegent Design by its very nature is a religion. It requires one to accept the existence of some greater intellectual being as responsible for everything's existence, a corner-stone of all religions.