Intelligent Design vs. Science

An edited version of this essay appeared in the Letters section of the
Minneapolis Star Tribune
November 19, 2005

As a rabbi and someone who feels pretty strongly that a loving intentional God had a role in defining and, yes, designing the course and evolution of the human spirit and all forms of life, I am sorely disheartened by the intelligent design vs. evolution argument.

The practitioners of various faiths who have gained significant attention and far too much power in their attempt to railroad intelligent design theories into public school science classrooms may see themselves as champions of their faith’s teachings and grand defenders of scriptural precision, but in fact they may ultimately come to be viewed as the greatest foes of a universal acceptance of any religious truth. With their polemics-as-usual tactics, and use of religious ideology as political clout, they force an already apprehensive society to hold in disdain, and in some cases to discard altogether, the beautiful possibility that there is great and divine purpose to all we behold. That’s not good for anyone.

Similarly, those who are deeply devoted to promulgating the scientific origins of all species through evolutionary theory in their fierce defense of church-state separation should take caution not to fall into a blindly offensive posture against religiously oriented people, young and old, who understand both evolution and divine architecture as truths that can be simultaneously embraced. This is also not good for anyone.

My own feeling is that any person of faith who doesn’t see the process of evolution as an integral part of the genius of creation is employing simplistic theology, ignoring empirical evidence that is both intellectually compelling and religiously inspiring. And any scientist who denigrates those of us who see God’s extraordinary fingerprint in the nature of all things human and otherwise, is being naïve and even irresponsible.

We all need to understand the proper place and time for our convictions. Indeed, intelligent design does not belong in a science classroom, but neither should a science teacher upbraid her class by saying that any student who has a viewpoint different from that of the strict evolutionary science being taught is being foolish (as I heard tell recently from one of my young congregants).

Most importantly, let us keep in mind that the accomplishments of science have saved millions and millions of lives, and so have the actions and achievements born of religious truths and firmly held faith values. Yanking down either religious sensibilities or scientific discoveries for political gain or ideological control is counterproductive to the overall progress of humankind, and is destructive to the state of our finely balanced world. I firmly believe that if science and faith are forced by narrow minded people on either side to battle over issues of intelligent design and evolution, everyone’s a loser. The future gifts of science and the fruits of religious endeavor will be sorely compromised.

If a modest intellect like Albert Einstein could see both the fundamental truths of science at work and the hand of God in the design, we should not so quickly fall prey to our disciplines as incontrovertible realities that cannot be harmonized with other great truths.

God doesn’t play dice, and we shouldn’t be such gamblers with our certainties either.