Why is Intelligent Design called "Intelligent Design"?

Question

Shouldn't it be called more like......... "MAGIC DESIGN" or something on those lines?

Answer 1

"Why is Intelligent Design called "Intelligent Design"?"

For the same reason that a bill that allows for clear-cutting of forests on a HUGE scale is called the "Healthy Forests Act" rather than "Leave No Tree Behind".

You can't sell stuff like that without a dishonest title.

It's positively Orwellian.

Answer 2

No. It refers to some "intelligence" (in other words, a god, whether it be the Christian God, or the Jewish god, or the Islamic god, or whatever) who helped to shape evolution along. It is a meeting point mostly between christians and scientists and helps to bridge the gap between evolution and creationsim.
Magic, on the other hand, mostly refers to sleight of hand and illusions.
and besides, Intelligent Design sounds more scientific than Magic Design.

Answer 3

If the layout were no longer basically smart yet made by potential of the excellent intelligence, then i will't imagine the way it would want to correctly be stronger upon. So the position does "microevolution" are available in? How can an identity proponent also even evaluate the concept?

Answer 4

Are you looking for a serious answer to this question? Magic had nothing to do with it. And those who call it a chaotic design refuse to open their eyes to see how everything works together in order for this whole existence to even function.

The chaotic parts were created by men who refuse to follow the guidelines God has given us.

Read the scriptures, you'll see the genius behind it all.

Answer 5

Because everyone enjoys a good joke.

"Hey, Bob, did ya hear about that Intelligent Design?"

It makes me laugh, at least.

Answer 6

Well that is a good question my answer might be a bit long, if you read it all, i am sure I would get best answer.
This is a step by step construction of the whole nine yards, so as I said it will be long,will you read it all?
1.What Meyer calls "biology for the information age," they call creationism in a lab coat. ID's core scientific principles - laid out in the mid-1990s by a biochemist and a mathematician - have been thoroughly dismissed on the grounds that Darwin's theories can account for complexity, that ID relies on
misunderstandings of evolution and flimsy probability
calculations, and that it proposes no testable explanations.
------------------------------...
2.At its heart, intelligent design is a revival of an argument made by British philosopher William Paley in 1802. In Natural Theology, the Anglican archdeacon suggested that the complexity of biological structures defied any explanation but a designer: God. Paley imagined finding a stone and a watch in a field. The watch, unlike the stone, appears to have been purposely assembled and wouldn't function without its precise combination of parts. "The inference," he wrote, "is inevitable, that the watch must have a maker." The same logic, he concluded, applied to biological structures like the vertebrate eye. Its complexity implied design.
------------------------------...
3.Paley re-emerged in the mid-1990s, however, when a pair of scientists reconstituted his ideas in an area beyond Darwin's ken: molecular biology. In his 1996 book Darwin's Black Box, Lehigh University biochemist Michael Behe contended that natural selection can't explain the "irreducible complexity" of molecular mechanisms like the bacterial flagellum, because its integrated parts offer no selective advantages on their own. Two years later, in The Design Inference, William Dembski, a philosopher and mathematician at Baylor University, proposed that any biological system exhibiting "information" that is both "complex" (highly improbable) and "specified" (serving a particular function) cannot be a product of chance or natural law. The only remaining option is an intelligent designer - whether God or an alien life force. These ideas became the cornerstones of ID, and Behe proclaimed the evidence for design to be "one of the greatest achievements in the history of science."
------------------------------...
4.The Darwinist materialist paradigm, however, is about to face the same revolution that Newtonian physics faced 100 years ago. Just as physicists discovered that the atom was not a massy particle, as Newton believed, but a baffling quantum arena accessible only through mathematics, so too are biologists coming to understand that the cell is not a simple lump of protoplasm, as Charles Darwin believed. It's a complex information-processing machine comprising tens of thousands of proteins arranged in fabulously intricate algorithms of communication and synthesis. The human body contains some 60 trillion cells. Each one stores information in DNA codes, processes and replicates it in three forms of RNA and thousands of supporting enzymes, exquisitely supplies the system with energy, and seals it in semipermeable phospholipid membranes. It is a process subject to the mathematical theory of information, which shows that even mutations occurring in cells at the gigahertz pace of a Pentium 4 and selected at the rate of a Google search couldn't beget the intricate interwoven fabric of structure and function of a human being in such a short amount of time. Natural selection should be taught for its important role in the adaption of species, but Darwinian materialism is an embarrassing cartoon of modern science.

What is the alternative? Intelligent design at least asks the right questions. In a world of science that still falls short of a rigorous theory of human consciousness or of the big bang, intelligent design theory begins by recognizing that everywhere in nature, information is hierarchical and precedes its embodiment. The concept precedes the concrete. The contrary notion that the world of mind, including science itself, bubbled up randomly from a prebiotic brew has inspired all the reductionist futilities of the 20th century, from Marx's obtuse materialism to environmental weather panic to zero-sum Malthusian fears over population. In biology classes, our students are not learning the largely mathematical facts of 21st-century science; they're imbibing the consolations of a faith-driven 19th-century materialist myth.

I know it is a long answer. I think it is the best answer though.
So they should teach it yes!

Answer 7

The human body is a mess. It is the antithesis of Intelligent Design. The wonder is not that it works so well, it's that it works at all.

Answer 8

Because someone of great intelligence designed the universe.

Answer 9

Umm, yea anything that conforms to known natural laws but has not been proved yet should be referred to as "magic".

I'm not sure that is a tenant of of even the undefinable atheistic creed.

Love ya though!

Answer 10

I'm sure if you could design every cell in the universe individually you would be intelligent too.

Sorry if that sounded sarcastic and mean..

The thing that amazes me most about your sarcasm is that Jesus still loves you.