Seattle Analytic Philosophy Club Message Board › Is Intelligent Design Science?

Is Intelligent Design Science?

Gene L
user 19640341
Group Organizer
Seattle, WA
Post #: 259
This thread is to discuss the question of whether or not intelligent design is science, to lead into the upcoming meetup. Please see the meeting writeup for background.

If you happen to think that ID is not science - why not?
Gene L
user 19640341
Group Organizer
Seattle, WA
Post #: 264
To start off the discussion, here are some statements from the Union of Concerned Scientists as to why intelligent design is not science.

The first statement seems false - I do not see why the existence of an intelligent agent could not be in principle be testable and falsifiable. In any case, notions of confirmation and falsifiability as a demarcation criteria for science have not been accepted in philosophy for a long time.

The second statement seems reasonable, although it is probably not an adequate criteria for saying something is not a science. Many aspects of string theory for example, may not be testable in the natural world. As for mechanism, the intelligent
design is the mechanism. Now one might ask how the intelligent designer came about, but ID itself could suffice as the "mechanism" for a specific question. For example, the designer could be arisen by natural selection, and then designed other organisms. In this case, the designer is the mechanism and the explanation for the organisms it designed.

http://www.ucsusa.org...­

Intelligent design is a scientific theory: A scientific theory is supported by extensive research and repeated experimentation and observation in the natural world. Unlike a true scientific theory, the existence of an “intelligent” agent can not be tested, nor is it falsifiable.

Intelligent design is based on the scientific method: Intelligent design might base its ideas on observations in the natural world, but it does not test them in the natural world, or attempt to develop mechanisms (such as natural selection) to explain their observations
Gene L
user 19640341
Group Organizer
Seattle, WA
Post #: 283
This meetup is being discussed on a well-known intelligent design blog. I've added a comment there.

http://www.uncommonde...­
George
user 74564852
Raleigh, NC
Post #: 34
No, ID is not science, nor is it below contempt. ID makes me wonder what are the reasons I don't believe ID and what are the reasons I believe there are such things as neutrons, electrons and sound waves.

As a matter of fact, I'm re-studying chemistry to find out based on what observations such inferences as atoms and chemical bonds were made. I don't know how American chemistry classes are taught. When I was first introduced to chemistry, the historical journeys of these discoveries were virtually omitted, except for a few anecdotes of the discoverers.

*If you think I belong to the nut house then you don't belong to this group.
George
user 74564852
Raleigh, NC
Post #: 35


Evidence of supreme intelligence seemingly unable to reason. Photo take at noon Sept 15, 2013 at Richmond Beach Saltwater Park.
George
user 74564852
Raleigh, NC
Post #: 36
One or more human members of this group know the inner working of my brain. They don't know that I know they know. Otherwise they wouldn't bother to drop me the notice.
In 2013 it doesn't impress me any more. Given sufficient knowledge of a person's past history, it is easy to predict her/his action. Look at these ads on my screen. They are all pretty acurate.
Scott L.
user 9968187
Renton, WA
Post #: 10
The moment you declare that the "intelligent designer" is discoverable, you have to decide what its attributes are. Since we are by definition referring to something supernatural, attempts to define this object will remain a moving target. I have not yet seen a definition of a measurable, observable, tangible, or quantifiable deity. And if you provide one, the theists are going to object, QED.
George
user 74564852
Raleigh, NC
Post #: 37
The moment you declare that the "intelligent designer" is discoverable, you have to decide what its attributes are.
I didn't say that. There is evidence neither enough to prove ID exists nor enough to prove ID doesn't exist. I feel a little hard pressed to prove that ID is not worth considering.

Philosophy is an offshoot of theology. Puzzles to philosophy are experiments to science. When considering ID's arguments, I come up with the following questions:

1. What sort of evidence can be used to prove a clock is designed by a human?
a. the observer him or her self engaged in the act of designing;
b. the observer saw a craftsperson designing a clock.
c. the observer heard testimony from someone else who is an observer of type a or b.

2. What sort of evidence can prove a jelly fish is not designed by a human?
I'm currently pulling my hair out to answer this question.







George
user 74564852
Raleigh, NC
Post #: 38
A Quote from Bertrand Russell's Autobiography:

"The last part of our time in America was spent at Princeton, where we had a little house on the shores of the lake. While in Princeton, I came to know Einstein fairly well. I used to go to his house once a week to discuss with him and Gödel and Pauli. These discussions were in some ways disappointing, for, although all three of them were Jews and exiles and, in intention, cosmopolitans, I found that they all had a German bias towards metaphysics, and in spite of our utmost endeavours we never arrived at common premisses from which to argue. Gödel turned out to be an unadulterated Platonist, and apparently believed that an eternal 'not' was laid up in heaven, where virtuous logicians might hope to meet it hereafter. "

Source: Autobiography
George
user 74564852
Raleigh, NC
Post #: 39
I'm the only one who is doing analytic here. So far, the rest of the group have only provided food for thoughts at best.

In this sphere of philosophy, we use miminum vocabulary and we deal with feelings only. "Understanding" and "Reason" are big words.

Back to business, why is it so hard to prove "there is no cheese in the larder?" http://books.google.c...­
Powered by mvnForum

Our Sponsors

  • DesignYum.com

    Our group is being sponsored by this outstanding design blog.

  • Chreia Press

    If the truth be told, few would listen.

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy