This letter is a reply to the opinion expressed by David G. Kives of Hoffman Estates in the June 2 Your Views. Mr. Kives takes issue with an earlier letter in which A. Sawicki suggested that alternatives such the concept of “intelligent design” be offered in public schools along with Darwin’s ideas on evolution.
After denigrating creationism and intelligent design as “pre-scientific religious myths and legends,” Kives asks if this is an attempt to promote “religious ideologies” and, if so, “whose?” But the question is not whose ideas should be offered, but rather which ideas most closely describe what is true.
Mr. Kives seems to have a blind spot inasmuch as he seems to think that only science, the study of temporal, physical reality, leads to the truth. Apparently, he thinks the Greek philosopher, Plato, was mistaken when he taught that our temporal world is only the world of “becoming” rather than the world of what is.
Perhaps Mr. Kives believes there is some sort of great wall of separation between the sciences and that which transcends our world of experience. If he were to look at the lives of such famous scientists as Linnaeus, Mendel and Pascal, he would understand that these people were not only scientists but men of great faith as well.
Did any of us will ourselves into existence or choose to be born? Is the marvelous complexity of the human eye and its function some happenstance of probability or is it the result of an intentional, intelligent design?
Thinking about a power higher than mankind predates our modern science. Religion is nothing more than the human response to God or, if you prefer, a “higher power.” It is as basic to humanity as the human desire to know.
Charles E. Glomski
Elk Grove VillageCopyright © 2014 Paddock Publications, Inc. All rights reserved.