- #1
A provocative essay on "intelligent design" by John Wilson -- editor of
Books & Culture and a Christianity Today editor at large...
...the essay argues...that "It's time to cool the rhetoric in the Intelligent Design dispute." While praising the "intelligent design" movement for what he takes to be its successes in identifying philosophical presuppositions of evolutionary theory and in compelling theistic evolutionists to improve the ways in which their views are formulated, Wilson identifies three ways in which "intelligent design" needs to clean up its act, arguing that "it is time for the ID crowd to stop suggesting that their 'accommodationist' rivals are largely driven by fear and careerism and other craven motives rather than by intellectual conviction," that "another unsatisfactory aspect of the current debate is the strategic refusal of the ID movement to engage in constructive
criticism of the Young Earth view," and that "If ID is going to foster
the pursuit of first-rate scientific work 'on a philosophically liberated
basis,' it would be more becoming to do some of the work first and
boast later."
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2004/009/24.62.html
The main difference between Intelligent Design (ID) and Evolution is their explanation of the origin and development of life on Earth. ID proposes that certain complex biological features are best explained by an intelligent cause, rather than natural processes. On the other hand, Evolution states that all species on Earth have descended from a common ancestor through natural selection and genetic mutations over millions of years.
No, Intelligent Design is not considered a scientific theory. A scientific theory must be supported by evidence and tested through experiments, and ID does not meet these criteria. Additionally, the concept of an intelligent cause is not testable and therefore cannot be studied scientifically.
The scientific community widely rejects Intelligent Design as a legitimate scientific theory. The theory is not supported by evidence or accepted scientific methods, and it is often seen as a way to introduce religious beliefs into science.
In the United States, the teaching of Intelligent Design in public schools has been ruled as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. This is because ID is not considered a scientific theory and therefore cannot be taught as an alternative to Evolution in science classrooms. However, Evolution can be taught alongside religious beliefs in other classes, such as philosophy or world religions.
No, there are no scientific arguments or evidence that support Intelligent Design. Proponents of ID often use gaps in scientific knowledge as evidence for an intelligent cause, but these gaps do not prove the existence of a designer. Furthermore, the theory of Evolution has a wealth of evidence from various fields of science, including genetics, paleontology, and geology.