Is "Intelligent Design" science or religion?

Question

Is "Intelligent Design" theory reasonable science? Or is "Intelligent Design" really just religion masking itself as science in order to prove the existence of God? Is it possible to answer scientific questions with religious answers? Is it possible to answer religious questions with scientific answers? I don't think so. What do you intelligent people think? Since there are 4 questions to answer PLEASE give four answers, even if your answers are just "yes" and "no." Thank you for your time.

"Jotho..", thank you for answering all four questions.

"Mel." thank you for answering my question the way I wanted it to be answered, thumbs up my friend.

If you don't obey instructions then you will get a thumbs down from me.

Thank you "Lets Torque" for your answers. Anthropocentric-def.: interpreting or regarding the world in terms of human values and experiences. I like the word. Thanks for using it.

Answer 1

It is not science.

It may be religion.

Either way, it's a pretty idiodic idea.

Intelligent Design / Intelligent Origin Theory
(aka: IDIOT)

4 answers: No, Yes, No, See Above...

Answer 2

intelligent design is not science...as it cannot be verified...nor is there proof...nor have any experiments nor studies been done...

You can answer anything with anything...the real question here is will it be accurate. If you answer science with religion...the chances that it will be accurate are low. Although, in the case archeology (for a long time the exodus was considered myth---also the Trojan war was considered myth....where as the myths themselves claimed to be true. And religion ended up winning that fight).

I think for the most part you can answer religion with science...but it will not always be the answer you want to hear. Science gives scientific answers not inspirational ones.

Intelligent people believe in science. Even people who believe in God...understand that you must "give onto Caesar what Caesar's and to God's what is God's..." And keep seccular thought apart from religious thought. some people comibine their science with the religion...I know many people that live a descently-happy life doing this (but I wouldn't call them intelligent--I guess there must intelligetn people that do this.)

I my self am an Atheist...I used to be Catholic...they I was Budhist for a long time. Now I'm an atheist.

Answer 3

1. No. It is in direct conflict with "mainstream science". It is a psuedo science, a farce..
2. Yes. And does a poor job of it..
3. No. Science is about the pursuit of knowledge and understanding. Religion stifles this pursuit for its own devious agendas..
4. Sometimes. But the answers are ignored or claimed to be incorrect, or not compatable with a religious doctrine, so are therefore irrelevant..

When presenting answers to religious questions about the natural world or the fields of science that describe them, and with references and clear access to scientific evidence and data, the offer is completely ignored and the issue evaded.

It is sheer ignorance and denial that allows room for an anthropocentric deity, and lies, fabricated "facts", pseudo science and misinformation are used in an attempt to defend the undefendable..
I hope that answers your questions..

Answer 4

Science and our understanding of life, nature, and space are not nearly advanced enough to understand how our world may have been created if it was, so ID is, for the moment, pushed by the religious to find answers that only science can give us. We've developed a terrible mindset where it's considered largely unscientific to be religious or believe in ID.

How sad, since the two really could have gone hand in hand. It may have been for the better, anyhow, since in the wrong hands the right science can lead to terrible things.

Answer 5

It doesn't even qualify as religion. ID was created from whole cloth by the Discovery Institute as a means to get Creationism taught in US schools. But even this is just part of their aims:

The Discovery Institutes stated goal - as expressed in the internal memo, the 'Wedge Document' (q.v.) is the removal of ALL aspects of modern life that conflict with a literal Biblical interpretation. They believe the righteousness of their end justifies the mendacity of their means. Look 'em up.

Regarding your sub-questions: a scientific answer will always tend to be as accurate as current knowledge permits. I've yet to see a religious answer - to any question - that had merit but wasn't plagiarised.

CD

Answer 6

You can't talk about "intelligent design" while ignoring the obvious question, "whose intelligence are we talking about?", or "who is the designer?". Which is why it is absurd to suggest that we introduce the idea of "intelligent design" into science classes, but avoid the subject of God. Either question takes you immediately into the realm of theology, not science. Some scientists, through their valid scientific work, have come to believe that what they are studying indicates an intelligent design, and that is fine as long as we recognize that they are not speaking as scientists on this particular point. Scientists, like any one else, are free to believe in God and His role in the creation of the universe, but such beliefs fall outside the purview of science. On such matters a scientist simply speaks as a private individual, the same as anyone in another profession.

Answer 7

Religion

Well there is no evidence supporting it and that makes it an untested hypothesis only. And it isn't a particularly compelling one.

No

Not sure what you would classify as a religious question. I would argue that science can eventually answer any question that is put to it about the nature and cause of the universe. I would not consider those religious questions.

Answer 8

It's religion of course. It's a theory concocted to make religion more palatable to today's youth. Some of the notions are so hideously ridiculous I personally can't believe anyone falls for it. So...

1. No
2. Yes!!
3. No
4. Yes

Answer 9

1 Science.
2 Very reasonable. Statistics nearly mandates it.
3 No. Religion may have given it impetus, but the logic is impeccable.
4 Probably not, but then, ID isn't a religious answer.

Answer 10

I certainly have a extra helpful concept. If god created intellegent circuits, he might desire to have created lesser intellegent circuits. meaning there are additionally circuits that don't obey "god's will" becuse intellegence is a byproduct of unfastened theory. So ofcording to intellegent modern-day the subsequent time I start up my automobile and it wont turn over, its becuse my automobile is possesed and the circuits are refusing to pass like god needs them to be. So fairly of taking my automobile to a mechanic to have my spark plugs replaced i might desire to take it to a church and have it blessed? Theories are in basic terms theories becuse they paintings. If it dosent paintings, its not a actual medical concept. additionally you may desire to learn some defeinitions. like the definition of a medical concept as antagonistic to a typical concept. medical theories are the abstraction from a great variety of distinctive tests and a resultant concept. with the intention to realize the status of concept a concept ( it fairly is triple for chemistry and physics) might desire to be near to appropriate. it could in basic terms have a small volume f errors. Circuit concept is powerful becuse that's a hundred%. additionally take a glance into the behaviour of electricity . Thats each and every of the info i might desire yet being as im not a physics style of guy i'm going to go away that to somebody who's.