[Dimensio]

You did not respond to the description of the course. Why is that?

What's the point of dealing with someone who thinks that an invitation of a dead man as a guest speaker is a valid practice?

What is your response?

It sounds like they're going to rehash typical creationist canards without bothering to present any positive evidence for ID. It's an anti-evolution course, not an ID course. Falsifying evolution will not amount to evidence that ID is correct. Moreover, the admission that even some of the arguments will be Biblically based means that it's not a philosophy course, but rather a course that assumes the correctness of a specific religion.

[microgood]

What's the point of dealing with someone who thinks that an invitation of a dead man as a guest speaker is a valid practice?

The guy was put on the syllabus before he died.

It's an anti-evolution course, not an ID course. Falsifying evolution will not amount to evidence that ID is correct.

Again, this is OK in Philosophy. We spent the first two years of Philosophy classes tearing down arguments. Do you really think you can eliminate anyone from arguing for ID and against evolution? If you want to see Christianity savaged, read 19th Century German Philosophy. Nietzsche and others party on it pretty hard.

Moreover, the admission that even some of the arguments will be Biblically based means that it's not a philosophy course, but rather a course that assumes the correctness of a specific religion.

One can make Biblical arguments in a Philosophy class. And one can tear them down. You may think this class is biased, and I am sure it is, but I never took a course in college in the Liberal arts majors that wasn't. All my philosophy teachers had their bent, and made no bones about it.