Changes

Unintelligent material causes consist simply of the interactions of the properties of matter, energy and the forces.  These interactions are generally governed by the laws of chemistry and physics, such as the laws of motion and thermodynamics.  These causes do not have the capacity to “know” the environment within which they exist and then seek to change it for a particular future purpose.  In other words, as stated by evolutionary biologist '''Douglas J. Futuyma''', they lack forward looking "foreknowledge. . . only an intelligent mind, one with the capacity for forethought, can have purpose.”<ref>“Darwin's immeasurably important contribution to science was to show how mechanistic causes could also explain all biological phenomena, despite their apparent evidence of design and purpose. By coupling undirected, purposeless variation to the blind, uncaring process of natural selection, Darwin made theological or spiritual explanations of the life processes superfluous. ......Darwin undid the essentialism that Western philosophy had inherited from Plato and Aristotle, and put variation in its place. He helped to replace a static conception of the world with the vision of a world of ceaseless change. Above all, his theory of random, purposeless variation acted on by blind, purposeless natural selection provided a revolutionary new kind of answer to almost all questions that begin with "Why?"  It cannot be sufficiently emphasized that before Darwin, both philosophers and people in general answered "Why?" questions by citing purpose. Only an intelligent mind, one with the capacity for forethought, can have purpose.  Thus questions like "Why do plants have flowers?" or "Why are there apple trees?"? or plagues, or storms? were answered by imagining the possible purpose that God could have had in creating them.” Douglas J. Futuyma, '''Evolutionary Biology''', Third Edition,(Sinauer Associates, Inc. 1998) p. 5, 8.</ref>   

Unintelligent material causes consist simply of the interactions of the properties of matter, energy and the forces.  These interactions are generally governed by the laws of chemistry and physics, such as the laws of motion and thermodynamics.  These causes do not have the capacity to “know” the environment within which they exist and then seek to change it for a particular future purpose.  In other words, as stated by evolutionary biologist '''Douglas J. Futuyma''', they lack forward looking "foreknowledge. . . only an intelligent mind, one with the capacity for forethought, can have purpose.”<ref>“Darwin's immeasurably important contribution to science was to show how mechanistic causes could also explain all biological phenomena, despite their apparent evidence of design and purpose. By coupling undirected, purposeless variation to the blind, uncaring process of natural selection, Darwin made theological or spiritual explanations of the life processes superfluous. ......Darwin undid the essentialism that Western philosophy had inherited from Plato and Aristotle, and put variation in its place. He helped to replace a static conception of the world with the vision of a world of ceaseless change. Above all, his theory of random, purposeless variation acted on by blind, purposeless natural selection provided a revolutionary new kind of answer to almost all questions that begin with "Why?"  It cannot be sufficiently emphasized that before Darwin, both philosophers and people in general answered "Why?" questions by citing purpose. Only an intelligent mind, one with the capacity for forethought, can have purpose.  Thus questions like "Why do plants have flowers?" or "Why are there apple trees?"? or plagues, or storms? were answered by imagining the possible purpose that God could have had in creating them.” Douglas J. Futuyma, '''Evolutionary Biology''', Third Edition,(Sinauer Associates, Inc. 1998) p. 5, 8.</ref>   

Material causes are to nature as thoughts are to a dead man.  The past, present and future is irrelevant to material causes for they can’t comprehend it. Unintelligent material causes are not merely blind watchmakers, they are mindless, purposeless, and meaningless. Lacking a mind, they lack the capacity to “make” anything.  Unintelligent material causes can adequately account for physical systems like the occurrence of rocks, rivers, wind and rain.  However, it is not clear how they account for time-dependent living systems or themselves.

Material causes are to nature as thoughts are to a dead man.  The past, present and future is irrelevant to material causes for they can't comprehend it. Unintelligent material causes are not merely blind watchmakers, they are mindless, purposeless, and meaningless. Lacking a mind, they lack the capacity to “make” anything.  Unintelligent material causes can adequately account for physical systems like the occurrence of rocks, rivers, wind and rain.  However, it is not clear how they account for time-dependent living systems or themselves.

The laws of motion explain that matter stays in its state of rest, or of uniform motion in a straight line, unless it is compelled to change that state by forces impressed upon it. Thus, patterns produced by material causes reflect an intersection of forces which start or stop the motion of matter.  An intervening warm spell that melted a glacier carrying rocks and boulders caused them to come to rest in an unsorted pattern as glacial till.  Similarly, when the Mississippi River hits the Gulf of Mexico it drops a load that forms a fan-shaped delta.   

The laws of motion explain that matter stays in its state of rest, or of uniform motion in a straight line, unless it is compelled to change that state by forces impressed upon it. Thus, patterns produced by material causes reflect an intersection of forces which start or stop the motion of matter.  An intervening warm spell that melted a glacier carrying rocks and boulders caused them to come to rest in an unsorted pattern as glacial till.  Similarly, when the Mississippi River hits the Gulf of Mexico it drops a load that forms a fan-shaped delta.   

Intelligent causes produced by minds are ubiquitous to the natural world.  Humans have minds, as do birds and beavers.  We are also finding that cellular systems appear to have a kind of internal intelligence.  The immune system consists of cells that act as forward observers that look for foreign invaders.  Those observers on the front line send messages to command central that develops weapons to be used to defend against the attack.   

Intelligent causes produced by minds are ubiquitous to the natural world.  Humans have minds, as do birds and beavers.  We are also finding that cellular systems appear to have a kind of internal intelligence.  The immune system consists of cells that act as forward observers that look for foreign invaders.  Those observers on the front line send messages to command central that develops weapons to be used to defend against the attack.   

Intelligent causes differ from unintelligent material causes in that intelligent causes have minds hooked up to input and output devices that have the capacity to manipulate unintelligent material causes for a purpose.  Intelligent causes perceive the present, store the perception in memory to build experience and then process the experience and knowledge to predict what will occur in the future.  Intelligent causes have knowledge that can be processed by processors to generate “foreknowledge,” while unintelligent material causes have neither.  Intelligent causes also have the capacity to choose to change the future so that a desired or intended goal or purpose is achieved and to generate outputs efficient to achieve the purpose.  Intelligent causes use unintelligent material causes and the stuff unintelligent material causes produce to make a bird’s nest, a beaver’s dam or an aqueduct.     

Intelligent causes differ from unintelligent material causes in that intelligent causes have minds hooked up to input and output devices that have the capacity to manipulate unintelligent material causes for a purpose.  Intelligent causes perceive the present, store the perception in memory to build experience and then process the experience and knowledge to predict what will occur in the future.  Intelligent causes have knowledge that can be processed by processors to generate “foreknowledge,” while unintelligent material causes have neither.  Intelligent causes also have the capacity to choose to change the future so that a desired or intended goal or purpose is achieved and to generate outputs efficient to achieve the purpose.  Intelligent causes use unintelligent material causes and the stuff unintelligent material causes produce to make a bird's nest, a beaver's dam or an aqueduct.     

Patterns produced by a mind like the dam, nest or aqueduct often reflect millions of precise starting and stopping points not found in systems driven only by the uniform motion of regular natural forces, stopped only by accidental opposing forces.  Patterns produced by intelligent causes integrate starts and stops for a purpose.  The integration becomes clear when the pattern is both complex and useful.  The integrated stopping points are evident in the case of the nest, dam and aqueduct.  But for the stopping of matter at integrated precise points, the assembly would not function as a whole.  This article reflects thousands of instances where matter has been started and then stopped – integrated - to produce precise, and hopefully understandable, meaning.  Unlike patterns produced by the chemical and physical necessity of matter in uniform motion, designs consist of patterns of stopping points that are integrated for a particular purpose.  Minds tie events together to for a purpose.  Material causes do not.  When the patterns are both complex and purposeful the inference to an intelligent cause is compelling.  

Patterns produced by a mind like the dam, nest or aqueduct often reflect millions of precise starting and stopping points not found in systems driven only by the uniform motion of regular natural forces, stopped only by accidental opposing forces.  Patterns produced by intelligent causes integrate starts and stops for a purpose.  The integration becomes clear when the pattern is both complex and useful.  The integrated stopping points are evident in the case of the nest, dam and aqueduct.  But for the stopping of matter at integrated precise points, the assembly would not function as a whole.  This article reflects thousands of instances where matter has been started and then stopped – integrated - to produce precise, and hopefully understandable, meaning.  Unlike patterns produced by the chemical and physical necessity of matter in uniform motion, designs consist of patterns of stopping points that are integrated for a particular purpose.  Minds tie events together to for a purpose.  Material causes do not.  When the patterns are both complex and purposeful the inference to an intelligent cause is compelling.  

Dembski describes his three-part '''explanatory filter''' together with an example of its use in a paper published at '''Access Research Network'''.<ref>http://www.arn.org</ref> In the paper, entitled ''The Explanatory Filter: A three-part filter for understanding how to separate and identify cause from intelligent design'',<ref>http://www.arn.org/docs/dembski/wd_explfilter.htm</ref>

Dembski describes his three-part '''explanatory filter''' together with an example of its use in a paper published at '''Access Research Network'''.<ref>http://www.arn.org</ref> In the paper, entitled ''The Explanatory Filter: A three-part filter for understanding how to separate and identify cause from intelligent design'',<ref>http://www.arn.org/docs/dembski/wd_explfilter.htm</ref>

Dembski found that all formal design detection methodologies can be reduced to three logical steps in what he refers to as an explanatory filter.  The filter first asks whether a given pattern is best explained by some chemical or physical necessity or law?  If not, can it be explained by chance.  If chance and necessity can’t explain the pattern, does it exhibit a “specification” or apparent purpose?  If a complex pattern reflecting the integration of numerous stopping points does exhibit purpose and can’t be explained by chance or necessity, then the scientific, logical inference to the best explanation is design.

Dembski found that all formal design detection methodologies can be reduced to three logical steps in what he refers to as an explanatory filter.  The filter first asks whether a given pattern is best explained by some chemical or physical necessity or law?  If not, can it be explained by chance.  If chance and necessity can't explain the pattern, does it exhibit a “specification” or apparent purpose?  If a complex pattern reflecting the integration of numerous stopping points does exhibit purpose and can't be explained by chance or necessity, then the scientific, logical inference to the best explanation is design.

===Informal Design Detection Methodology===

===Informal Design Detection Methodology===

Intelligent design theorists recognize that the scientific method places limits as to the kind of knowledge that can be determined scientifically.  Intelligent design theorists hold that intelligent design is a logical inference based on observation of material evidence in nature.  That is, intelligent design can be determined as a matter of science alone in full accord with the scientific method.  But science can say little about who the designer is.

Intelligent design theorists recognize that the scientific method places limits as to the kind of knowledge that can be determined scientifically.  Intelligent design theorists hold that intelligent design is a logical inference based on observation of material evidence in nature.  That is, intelligent design can be determined as a matter of science alone in full accord with the scientific method.  But science can say little about who the designer is.

The intelligent design position is expressed well in an article by Casey Luskin entitled '''''Principled (not Rhetorical) Reasons Why Intelligent Design Doesn’t Identify the Designer'''''.  Luskin states, referring to a law review article he co-authored:

The intelligent design position is expressed well in an article by Casey Luskin entitled '''''Principled (not Rhetorical) Reasons Why Intelligent Design Doesn't Identify the Designer'''''.  Luskin states, referring to a law review article he co-authored:

<blockquote>

<blockquote>