Intelligent design controversy

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The intelligent design controversy is the most important intellectual and political dispute of modern times, involving questions of science, philosophy, law, and religion. Intelligent design addresses the origins debate, attempting to establish an objective, scientific midway position between Creationism and Darwinism.[1]

  • intelligent design does not address metaphysical and religious questions such as the nature or identity of the designer.[2]

Opponents of intelligent design are very persistent, like a bulldog[3] or rottweiler, insisting that there is not and cannot be any distinction between intelligent design theories and the theological ideas of Creationism. For evolutionists, there are only two possible and mutually exclusive positions:

  1. the scientific hypothesis that life came into being and continued to evolve entirely as a result of natural forces
  2. the religious doctrine that God created life and Personally created some or species

ID opponents define the terms of the debate to classify any hypothesis which contradicts evolution as "Creationism". For example, Eugenie Scott calls it "intelligent design creationism", indicated the common claim that ID is nothing more than a variant of creationist dogma.

In fact, evolutionists have no answer to ID's arguments and therefore refuse to deal forthrightly with its proponents.


  1. In the context of this article "Darwinism" is considered to be the materialistic view that life came into being without any intervention by God at all, i.e., "molecules to men" merely by chance and natural law.
  2. The Truth About Discovery Institute's Center for Science & Culture
  3. Huxley remarked to student Henry Fairfield Osborn, twentieth-century American paleontologist and director of the American Museum of Natural History, back in the mid-seventies:about Charles Darwin, "You know I have to take care of him–in fact, I have always been Darwin's bull dog." The Huxley File

See also