Changes

'''Intelligent design''' '''(ID)''' is the empirically testable<ref>"Dembski and Wells argue calmly and convincingly that intelligent design theory is empirically testable (in spite of Darwinists' shrill protests to the contrary) by indicating precisely what it would take to refute the theory, namely a clear demonstration that systems exhibiting [[irreducible complexity]] with specified complexity can in fact arise spontaneously by purely material processes" source: [https://www.amazon.com/The-Design-Life-Discovering-Intelligence/dp/0980021308 The Design of Life: Discovering Signs of Intelligence in Biological Systems - Amazon page]</ref> theory that the natural world shows signs of having been designed by a purposeful, intelligent cause.<ref>

'''Intelligent design''' '''(ID)''' is the empirically testable<ref>"Dembski and Wells argue calmly and convincingly that intelligent design theory is empirically testable (in spite of Darwinists' shrill protests to the contrary) by indicating precisely what it would take to refute the theory, namely a clear demonstration that systems exhibiting [[irreducible complexity]] with specified complexity can in fact arise spontaneously by purely material processes" source: [https://www.amazon.com/The-Design-Life-Discovering-Intelligence/dp/0980021308 The Design of Life: Discovering Signs of Intelligence in Biological Systems - Amazon page]</ref> theory that the natural world shows signs of having been designed by a purposeful, intelligent cause.<ref>

An inference that certain biological information may be the product of an intelligent cause can be tested or evaluated in the same manner as scientists daily test for design in other sciences. [http://www.uncommondescent.com/id-defined/ ID Defined]</ref> As [[Jonathan Wells]] wrote, "ID ... asserts only that some features of living things are better explained by an intelligent cause than by unguided processes." <ref>http://www.evolutionnews.org/2009/11/wired_science_one_long_bluff028441.html</ref> Wells, among others, uses ID to rebut the [[evolution|Darwinian]] assertion that the features of living things are "inexplicable on the theory of [[creation]]" but fully explicable as products of unguided natural forces.<ref>http://www.discovery.org/a/9151</ref> However, there is worldview diversity among proponents. Alfred Russel Wallace who was the co-discoverer of [[natural selection]] along with Charles Darwin, eventually came to see that nature exhibited design and purpose with evolution, and in particular wrote about the advancements of research on the cell in the chapter "Mystery of the Cell" along with observations on man as being designed with purpose.<ref>Alfred Russel Wallace. 1911. [https://archive.org/details/worldoflifemanif00wallialaThe World of Life: A Manifestation of Creative Power, Directive Mind and Ultimate Purpose]</ref><ref name="intelligent evolution">Flannery, M.A. Alfred Russel Wallace’s Intelligent Evolution and Natural Theology. Religions 2020, 11, 316. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel11060316</ref><ref>Flannery, Michael A. 2011. Alfred Russel Wallace’s Theory of Intelligent Evolution: How Wallace’s World of Life Challenged Darwinism, rev ed. Riesel: Erasmus Press</ref> Some intelligent design proponents such as Michael Behe carry on the ''intelligent evolution'' espoused by Alfred Russel Wallace.<ref name="intelligent evolution" /> Another ID proponent is David Berlinski who is actually an agnostic atheist.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20150312200118/https://www.discovery.org/a/4536/ Agnostic takes New Atheists to Task for Trying to Hijack Science Author David Berlinski's New Book The Devil's Delusion]</ref>  

An inference that certain biological information may be the product of an intelligent cause can be tested or evaluated in the same manner as scientists daily test for design in other sciences. [http://www.uncommondescent.com/id-defined/ ID Defined]</ref> As [[Jonathan Wells]] wrote, "ID ... asserts only that some features of living things are better explained by an intelligent cause than by unguided processes." <ref>http://www.evolutionnews.org/2009/11/wired_science_one_long_bluff028441.html</ref> Wells, among others, uses ID to rebut the [[evolution|Darwinian]] assertion that the features of living things are "inexplicable on the theory of [[creation]]" but fully explicable as products of unguided natural forces.<ref>http://www.discovery.org/a/9151</ref> However, there is worldview diversity among proponents, and intelligent design is a secular theory. Alfred Russel Wallace who was the co-discoverer of [[natural selection]] along with Charles Darwin, eventually came to see that nature exhibited design and purpose with evolution, and in particular wrote about the advancements of research on the cell in the chapter "Mystery of the Cell" along with observations on man as being designed with purpose.<ref>Alfred Russel Wallace. 1911. [https://archive.org/details/worldoflifemanif00wallialaThe World of Life: A Manifestation of Creative Power, Directive Mind and Ultimate Purpose]</ref><ref name="intelligent evolution">Flannery, M.A. Alfred Russel Wallace’s Intelligent Evolution and Natural Theology. Religions 2020, 11, 316. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel11060316</ref><ref>Flannery, Michael A. 2011. Alfred Russel Wallace’s Theory of Intelligent Evolution: How Wallace’s World of Life Challenged Darwinism, rev ed. Riesel: Erasmus Press</ref> Some intelligent design proponents such as Michael Behe carry on the ''intelligent evolution'' espoused by Alfred Russel Wallace.<ref name="intelligent evolution" /> Another ID proponent is David Berlinski who is actually an agnostic atheist.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20150312200118/https://www.discovery.org/a/4536/ Agnostic takes New Atheists to Task for Trying to Hijack Science Author David Berlinski's New Book The Devil's Delusion]</ref>  

The central idea of Intelligent Design theory is that [[design]] is empirically detectable, just as the detectability of design in man-made objects is straightforward, non-controversial,  and often intuitive (see: [[design detection]]).  With respect to the origin and development of cosmological and biological systems, Intelligent Design theory holds that the same principles provide a logical inference of design in nature.  That is, without necessarily "proving" actual intelligent design in nature, the observable material evidence provides a reasonable basis from which to infer design, and such an inference supports a legitimate scientific hypothesis of ''intelligent'' design.  As such, Intelligent Design theory is a scientific disagreement with the core claim of materialistic theories of [[evolution]] such as chemical and Darwinian evolution <ref>Darwinian Evolution: A materialistic theory of the history of the diversification of organisms from common ancestors through a process of descent with modification. The theory postulates that evolutionary change is the result of material causes [i.e., unintelligent causes due to the interactions of matter, energy, and the forces of nature], driven primarily by random variation and natural selection.  The forces include gravity, the electromagnetic force and the weak and strong nuclear forces that define the structure of atoms. With respect to explaining the cosmos, the laws of chemistry and physics such as the laws of motion and thermodynamics dictate that material causes operate in generally periodic or regular patterns at best, and in entropy-increasing randomness at worst. ''See'', "Thirty-eight Nobel Laureates, ''Nobel Laureates Initiative,'' (The Elie Wiesel Foundation for Humanity, September 9, 2005), stressing to Kansas State Board of Education: “[E]volution is understood to be the result of an unguided, unplanned process of random variation and natural selection.”</ref> that the design exhibited in our universe is merely ''apparent'' design, i.e., ''unintelligent'' design caused by unguided, purposeless, natural forces of physics and chemistry alone.<ref>As used in this article, "materialism" is used synonymously with "naturalism". Naturalism is a philosophical doctrine that material causes alone are adequate to account for all natural phenomena and that teleological (design) conceptions of nature are invalid.</ref>

The central idea of Intelligent Design theory is that [[design]] is empirically detectable, just as the detectability of design in man-made objects is straightforward, non-controversial,  and often intuitive (see: [[design detection]]).  With respect to the origin and development of cosmological and biological systems, Intelligent Design theory holds that the same principles provide a logical inference of design in nature.  That is, without necessarily "proving" actual intelligent design in nature, the observable material evidence provides a reasonable basis from which to infer design, and such an inference supports a legitimate scientific hypothesis of ''intelligent'' design.  As such, Intelligent Design theory is a scientific disagreement with the core claim of materialistic theories of [[evolution]] such as chemical and Darwinian evolution <ref>Darwinian Evolution: A materialistic theory of the history of the diversification of organisms from common ancestors through a process of descent with modification. The theory postulates that evolutionary change is the result of material causes [i.e., unintelligent causes due to the interactions of matter, energy, and the forces of nature], driven primarily by random variation and natural selection.  The forces include gravity, the electromagnetic force and the weak and strong nuclear forces that define the structure of atoms. With respect to explaining the cosmos, the laws of chemistry and physics such as the laws of motion and thermodynamics dictate that material causes operate in generally periodic or regular patterns at best, and in entropy-increasing randomness at worst. ''See'', "Thirty-eight Nobel Laureates, ''Nobel Laureates Initiative,'' (The Elie Wiesel Foundation for Humanity, September 9, 2005), stressing to Kansas State Board of Education: “[E]volution is understood to be the result of an unguided, unplanned process of random variation and natural selection.”</ref> that the design exhibited in our universe is merely ''apparent'' design, i.e., ''unintelligent'' design caused by unguided, purposeless, natural forces of physics and chemistry alone.<ref>As used in this article, "materialism" is used synonymously with "naturalism". Naturalism is a philosophical doctrine that material causes alone are adequate to account for all natural phenomena and that teleological (design) conceptions of nature are invalid.</ref>