Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
228 bytes added ,  02:47, August 25, 2025
no edit summary
Line 5: Line 5:  
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, or even non-religious, 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 prominent 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> Other atheist defenders have been Bradley Monton.<ref>Bradley Monton, Seeking God in Science: An Atheist Defends Intelligent Design, 2009, Broadview Press, ISBN 9781551118635.</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, or even non-religious, 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 prominent 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> Other atheist defenders have been Bradley Monton.<ref>Bradley Monton, Seeking God in Science: An Atheist Defends Intelligent Design, 2009, Broadview Press, ISBN 9781551118635.</ref>  
   −
In general, design principles is compatible with biology since design is already used many biologicals fields.<ref>Castle, S.D., Stock, M. & Gorochowski, T.E. Engineering is evolution: a perspective on design processes to engineer biology. Nature Communications 15, 3640 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-48000-1</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>
+
In general, design principles is compatible with biology since design is already used many biologicals fields.<ref>Castle, S.D., Stock, M. & Gorochowski, T.E. Engineering is evolution: a perspective on design processes to engineer biology. Nature Communications 15, 3640 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-48000-1</ref><ref>Janes KA, Chandran PL, Ford RM, Lazzara MJ, Papin JA, Peirce SM, Saucerman JJ, Lauffenburger DA. An engineering design approach to systems biology. Integr Biol (Camb). 2017 Jul 17;9(7):574-583. doi: 10.1039/c7ib00014f</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>
    
In a broader sense, Intelligent Design is simply the science of design detection—how to recognize patterns arranged by an intelligent cause for a purpose. Design detection is used in a number of scientific fields, including anthropology, archeology, forensic sciences, cryptanalysis and the search for extraterrestrial intelligence ('''[[SETI]]'''). An inference that certain cosmological and biological features of the natural world 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.<ref>For example, Stephen C. Meyer, Senior Fellow of the Center for Science and Culture at the Discovery Institute, notes at [http://www.discovery.org/a/1671 A Note to Teachers Stephen C. Meyer and Mark Hartwig, Pandas and People: The Central Question of Biological Origins May 1, 1993], the problem with limiting explanations to only "natural" causes: "Archaeologists routinely distinguish manufactured objects (e.g., arrowheads, potsherds) from natural ones (e.g., stones), even when the differences between them are very subtle. These manufactured objects then become important clues in reconstructing past ways of life. But if we arbitrarily assert that science explains solely by reference to natural laws, if archaeologists are prohibited from invoking an intelligent manufacturer, the whole archaeological enterprise comes to a grinding halt."</ref>
 
In a broader sense, Intelligent Design is simply the science of design detection—how to recognize patterns arranged by an intelligent cause for a purpose. Design detection is used in a number of scientific fields, including anthropology, archeology, forensic sciences, cryptanalysis and the search for extraterrestrial intelligence ('''[[SETI]]'''). An inference that certain cosmological and biological features of the natural world 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.<ref>For example, Stephen C. Meyer, Senior Fellow of the Center for Science and Culture at the Discovery Institute, notes at [http://www.discovery.org/a/1671 A Note to Teachers Stephen C. Meyer and Mark Hartwig, Pandas and People: The Central Question of Biological Origins May 1, 1993], the problem with limiting explanations to only "natural" causes: "Archaeologists routinely distinguish manufactured objects (e.g., arrowheads, potsherds) from natural ones (e.g., stones), even when the differences between them are very subtle. These manufactured objects then become important clues in reconstructing past ways of life. But if we arbitrarily assert that science explains solely by reference to natural laws, if archaeologists are prohibited from invoking an intelligent manufacturer, the whole archaeological enterprise comes to a grinding halt."</ref>
SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, edit
254

edits

Navigation menu