In that case, evolutionists should have no problem with the introduction of "intelligent design" or raw "creationism" into the schools, since those really broach something other than evolution, and hence are no threat to Darwinism.
Actually the author of the statement doesn't really understand ID either, amazingly.
ID is basically a religious bastardization of evolution, not merely a theory of creation.
I certainly don't, so long as such metaphysical conjectures aren't taught as science.
In that case, evolutionists should have no problem with the introduction of "intelligent design" or raw "creationism" into the schools, since those really broach something other than evolution, and hence are no threat to Darwinism.
No problem at all. If someone develops a successful creationistic theory ("successful" meaning only that working scientists find it useful enough to address and apply in their ongoing research) then it can be taught. The nice thing under these circumstances is that it will be taught, as a matter of course, simply because it's part of science and science is what science curricula generally try to include.
You see if you insist that theories only be included in curricula on the basis of merit, then you don't have to resort to the popular pressure tactics and politics that are necessary if you seek inclusion on the basis of intellectual affirmative action and wishy-washy, relativistic arguments of "balance" and "fairness".
Exactly. LOL
"Special Creation" does not accept speciation, and so is incompatible with the theory of evolution.
Intelligent Design is philosophical proposition which raises very interesting questions. It it perfectly acceptable for teaching in a public school, but should be discussed in a philosophy class.
At this point in its development, the proponents of Intelligent Design have to answer the philosophical question "Is it possible to tell the difference between something which has been designed and something which merely appears to be designed?" This question involves elements of logic, epistemology, and possibly metaphysics--all philosophical disciplines.
If the question stated above can be answered in the affirmative, then it may be possible to develop practical methods for distinguishing actual design from apparent design. At that point, such methods could be used to collect evidence for or against a scientific theory of Intelligent Design. Until such methods exist, however, ID will remain philosophy, not natural science.