Is Intelligent Design Creationism?

Filed under: ID — Barry Carey at 3:37 pm on Tuesday, April 8, 2008

Today, I’ll begin a series consisting of a few posts dealing with the question of whether Intelligent Design is nothing more than disguised creationism.

Opponents say the legislation in the House and Senate is just a veiled attempt to inject religious beliefs about the creation of life into science lessons, but Stein and other supporters denied that.

So stated the Associated Press reporter covering actor Ben Stein’s recent visit to the Florida State Capital in support of academic freedom to question Darwinian evolution in public schools. This claim is heard over and over whenever Intelligent Design is publicly discussed. Intelligent design is often characterized by the scientific establishment as an attempt on the part of religious fundamentalists to smuggle religion into the classroom under the guise of science. The Intelligent design movement denies that it is a veiled attempt to teach creationism in public schools, but is, instead, an effort to return science to an objective search for truth about the natural world. Efforts to paint the movement as “creationism” is a rhetorical tactic to marginalize intelligent design without seriously addressing the arguments presented.

Defining the relevant terms is essential if one is to intelligently discuss this controversy. Intelligent design is defined by those in the forefront of the movement as…

… the study of patterns in nature that are best explained as the product of intelligence.

Intelligent Design holds to three basic tenets:

1. Specified complexity is well-defined and empirically detectable.
2. Undirected natural causes are incapable of explaining specified complexity.
3. Intelligent causation best explains specified complexity.

Evolution is a word with varied meanings. The common sense meaning of change over time is not questioned by the intelligent design movement. What is opposed by them is Darwinian evolution, that is, the explanation that all life is the result of purely material and mechanical processes without the input of intelligence.

Creationism, like evolution, is another term which is susceptible to equivocation. Therefore, one must be clear when using such a term. Creationism may be defined broadly as the belief that a supernatural being created the universe out of nothing. This encompasses many varying viewpoints, from a belief in a several thousand-year-old universe, to a belief that the universe is 15 billion years old and all complex life on earth arose by means of theistic evolution.

In the discussion of intelligent design, by creationist, one usually means a person who believes that the biblical account of creation recorded in Genesis is scientifically accurate. This latter sense is the one most often found in media discussions today wherein Creationism is frequently equated with “Young Earth Creationism,” the belief that the earth is around 7,000 years old.

Next, I’ll consider some criticisms offered by opponents of Intelligent Design that are used in support of equating ID and Creationism.

3 Comments »

Comment by Unapologetic Catholic

April 8, 2008 @ 8:49 pm

“Specified complexity is well-defined and empirically detectable.”

Can you define “specified complexity,” please?

Can you describe a method of reliable detectibility of specified complexity?

“In the discussion of intelligent design, by creationist, one usually means a person who believes that the biblical account of creation recorded in Genesis is scientifically accurate. This latter sense is the one most often found in media discussions today wherein Creationism is frequently equated with “Young Earth Creationism,” the belief that the earth is around 7,000 years old.”

That’s inaccurate. What is meant by “creationist” or “creationism” is a claim that some bilogical systems were created by a violation of the laws of nature, a “miracle.” Creationism in this context includes YEC, OEC and separate creation of humans.

Comment by BobC

April 8, 2008 @ 8:55 pm

Intelligent design is a childish idiotic religious belief in supernatural magic. It’s a boring idea that has nothing to do with science. It was invented to disguise god-did-it idiocy to look like science to force science teachers to teach religious ideas instead of the science of biological evolution. It didn’t work. In Dover the intelligent design creationist liars cost the taxpayers one million dollars. These attempts to dumb down science education never will work. Intelligent design creationists can either join the 21st century, or they can keep their breathtaking stupidity in church where it belongs. They will never be allowed to stick their magical designer (God) into public school science education.

“without the input of intelligence” should be “without the input of magic”.

ID = magic = childish stupidity.

“Efforts to paint the movement as ‘creationism’ is a rhetorical tactic to marginalize intelligent design without seriously addressing the arguments presented.”

Pure crap. The designer is God. God is creationism. ID creationists are compulsive liars.

Comment by John the Skeptic

April 8, 2008 @ 10:02 pm

The modern ID movement grew in the aftermath of the 1987 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Edwards v. Aguillard. The creationist provenance of the ID movement is meticulously documented in Creationism’s Trojan Horse: The Wedge of Intelligent Design
by Barbara Forrest and Paul R. Gross.

Even more evidence for the true nature of ID as a stalking horse for creationism came to light during the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial, which gave us the memorable neologism “cdesign proponentist”.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>