Ken Miller, the biologist and witness for the Dover trial (and not to be confused with Ken Miller), presented a lecture (originally scheduled as a debate) at Case Western Reserve University on January 3, 2006. Miller’s home page contains links to the lecture, although I also found one floating around on youtube. Miller’s a showman but the arguments he puts forward are quite convincing. There’s also an evolution resources page available on his site. I’m still rummaging around for a back and forth between an ID supporter and opponent, although this comes close.
The point on Intelligent Design supporters jumping the scientific process in order to teach the controversy is quite a crucial one, as is Miller having to relabel the sticker placed on his text (shown above) to warn students that all scientific theories, and not merely evolution, should be judged critically. As far as teaching the controversy is concerned though, would it not make more sense to touch on epistemology, logic, and the philosophy of science? To suggest that evolution is dogmatic while replacing it with another dogma, that of irreducible complexity, is far from a sound education. Give me a debate in science education, but, dear professors and teachers, why not equip us students with the means to think scientifically, logically, mathematically, and rationally? It seems to me this is a lot closer to ‘teaching the controversy’ and will leave us far more prepared to face our dissertations, and maybe even our ethics review boards.
And hey, check this out.
