What do you mean by "Intelligent Design"?

Question

Recently I have had some interaction with a number of people (particularly through my blog at http://exploringourmatrix.blogspot.com) and it was suggested that I was "painting with too broad a brush." It does seem to me that this terminology of "intelligent design" is being used by different people and different groups in very significantly different ways.

Is it a view you subscribe to? How would you define it?

The link for my blog should not include that parenthesis. The address, if anyone is interested, is:

http://exploringourmatrix.blogspot.com

Answer 1

So many people these days are confusing biblical creationism with intelligent design. "Intelligent Design is the study of patterns in nature that are best explained as the result of intelligence" (Dr. William Dembski). That's it; it says nothing of who the creator is and how he/she/it/they did it. Intelligent Design encompasses every "creation" story, even aliens seeding life on this planet.

William Paley is famous for using the design argument. In 1802, he came out with a treatise called Natural Theology. He began by arguing that if one were to discover a watch lying in the middle of nowhere and they were to examine that watch closely, the person would logically conclude that it was not an accident, but had purpose; it had a designer. He went on to argue that the overwhelming design in the universe is evidence of a Grand Designer.

Now, is this a valid argument? Well, we detect design all the time. If you find an arrowhead on a deserted island, you assume it was made by someone, even if you can’t see the designer. We can tell the difference between a message written in the sand and the results of the wind and waves on the sand. The carved heads of the presidents on Mt. Rushmore are clearly different from erosional features.

The thing is, reliable methods for detecting design exist and are employed in forensics, archeology, and data fraud analysis. These methods can easily be employed to detect design in biological systems.

When being interviewed by Tavis Smiley, Dr. Stephen Meyer said, “There are developments in some technical fields, complexity and information sciences, that actually enable us to distinguish the results of intelligence as a cause from natural processes. When we run those modes of analysis on the information in DNA, they kick out the answer, ‘Yeah, this was intelligently designed’ . . . There is actually a science of design detection and when you analyze life through the filters of that science, it shows that life was intelligently designed.”

And for those who put so much faith in peer-review, check this out: http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=2640&program=CSC%20-%20Scientific%20Research%20and%20Scholarship%20-%20Science

The four main areas the ID movement focuses on: Information Theory, Irreducible Complexity, The Anthropic Principle, and The Design Inference.

What about teaching it in school? I'm sorry, but I have to agree with George W. Bush: "Both sides ought to be properly taught . . . so people can understand what the debate is about . . . Part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought . . . You're asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, the answer is yes.”

Good science teaching should include controversies. Most Christians I know don't want biblical creationism taught in science classes. What we want is for molecules-to-man evolution to be taught with all its warts (they are not even allowed to present evidence that would put evolution in a poor light). And we want intelligent design to at least to be presented. Unlike leprechauns and unicorns, etc., a significant percentage of the population believes in ID.

Answer 2

Intelligent Design is the belief that the world as we know it is too complex to have happened by chance, therefore, it must have been designed by something. Intelligent Design does not try to describe the designer or its method of design. The designer could be God or aliens or some other unknown. The method could have been evolution, sporadic creation, or some other means. Creationism, onn the other hand, teaches that the world as we know it was created by God according to the description given in Genesis. I, personally, subscribe to Creationism which means, by default, I also subscribe to Intelligent Design.

Answer 3

Intelligent design, as I have been taught in philosophy, means the way that the world has flow and yet is stringent. The cyclic nature of seasons, life and death, the way a leaf can do all sorts of wicked stuff, the daily rising of the moon and sun in such a way that they perfectly sustain life. On a personal note, a quick skim of your blog left me wanting to read the whole thing!

Answer 4

The Intelligent Design Theory says that “intelligent causes are necessary to explain the complex, information-rich structures of biology and that these causes are empirically detectable” (William Dembski, Intelligent Design, Downer’s Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity, 1999, p. 106).

Certain biological features defy the standard Darwinian “random-chance” explanation. They appear to have been designed. Since design logically necessitates an intelligent designer, the appearance of design is cited as evidence for a Designer. There are three primary arguments in the Intelligent Design Theory: (1) irreducible complexity, (2) specified complexity, and (3) the anthropic principle.

Answer 5

I mean the same thing as the people who originated the notion. Since they are the very same people who promoted teaching creationism in science classrooms, then failing at that they repackaged creationism renamed it intelligent design and tried again.

It's simply creationism with the references to a specific deity removed.

Honestly the people who should be most opposed to this are Christians. The promoters of creationism as science are constantly pushing to have Christianity forced through the filter of scientific methodology.

Christians - whenever you hear someone talking about "science trying to disprove god" understand that the reality is it isn't science, it isn't scientists it's promoters of 'intelligent design' who are forcing your belief to be scrutinized by scientific methodology by calling it science.

---
Kait you could remove "irreducible complexity" from your list since even it's main proponent has had to admit that every example he has given to support it was been proven invalid and all but conceded it likely has no valid examples.

Answer 6

It is a "proposed" hypothesis that has no supporting evidence. By "proposed", I mean that it was not submitted for peer review or published in any recognized science journal. In order for a theory to be accepted, the studies are reviewed, the data examined, and the results repeated, along with other steps. This ensures that someone does not claim to have changed lead into gold or claim to have proven something that they have not.

Answer 7

As one who believes in God but also considers herself agnostic, I would have to say that I am open to the possibility of a God having "designed" the universe, but I'm not at all convinced that it is true. That would leave open the question of who designed God, putting us right back where we started. Evolution of all things - including God - just makes more sense to me.

Answer 8

Intelligent design, meaning that someone of a higher being created (designed) earth and its inhabitants. For example God

Answer 9

It means you are able to "read" other peoples emotions with no problem; i.e., you could notice that someone is sad just by the they speak. It could also mean that you are in tune with your own emotions.

Answer 10

Creationism II - ' the re-run'.

I think it is mostly Christians using religion and pseudoscience to try and disprove evolutionary theory.