Fathers’ Rights

A Chicago Blog

What is Intelligent Design?

Posted by madcap on July 2, 2008

This is a article from Evolution News& Views that sums up the premise of ID. One need not have a connection with religion in order to conclude that some sort of intelligent designer (God), rather than random chance, governs the cosmos. It’s more a matter of common sense.

The new war is not about evolution and creation, but about Darwinism and something called ‘intelligent design.’

Intelligent design maintains that it is possible to infer from empirical evidence that some features of the natural world are best explained by an intelligent cause rather than unguided natural processes. Since ID relies on evidence rather than on scripture or religious doctrines, it is not creationism or a form of religion.

ID restricts itself to a simple question: does the evidence point to design in nature?

ID does not deny the reality of variation and natural selection; it just denies that those phenomena can accomplish all that Darwinists claim they can accomplish.

ID does not maintain that all species were created in their present form; indeed, some ID advocates have no quarrel with the idea that all living things are descended from a common ancestor. ID challenges only the sufficiency of unguided natural processes and the Darwinian claim that design in living things is an illusion rather than a reality.

Unlocking the Mysteries of Life. Video

3 Responses to “What is Intelligent Design?”

  1. flippertie said

    Intelligent design maintains that it is possible to infer from empirical evidence that some features of the natural world are best explained by an intelligent cause rather than unguided natural processes.

    Unfortunately for proponents of ID inference is not evidence. Most open minded scientists will agree that it remains possible that an intelligent agent has at some point tinkered with details of the evolutionary process on this planet, the key point is that there is absolutely no positive evidence that this has actually happened.
    Every attempt to demonstrate irreducible complexity (Behe’s gambit), or specified complexity (Dembski’s) has been comprehensively refuted, or shown to be false.
    The fact that there are some processes that evolutionary science and theory cannot (yet) explain does not mean that those processes must have been guided. Without actual evidence of the designers existence and/or the process it used, and/or the occasions when it intervened in the evolutionary process the idea of an intelligent agent remains interesting speculation, hardly worth the designation “hypothesis”, and certainly not “theory”

    Since ID relies on evidence rather than on scripture or religious doctrines, it is not creationism or a form of religion.

    ID does not deny the reality of variation and natural selection; it just denies that those phenomena can accomplish all that Darwinists claim they can accomplish.

    Again – where is the evidence?. Saying that something looks designed is not enough. Denying that variation and natural selection can create complexity, or specific features is not enough.

    Yes the world is awe inspiring, yes it is almost unimaginably complex, but no – this does not mean that we need to postulate some even more awe inspiring and complex being in order to explain what we see.

  2. madcap said

    “The fact that there are some processes that evolutionary science and theory cannot (yet) explain ”

    Like, how did life start?

  3. madcap said

    “inference is not evidence”

    Is this true when it comes to dark matter and dark energy?

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: