Quote:
|
Originally Posted by alansmithee
Well, I'll then admit I haven't kept up to date on exactly what ID is currently being promoted as. I've read much more about evolution and abiogenesis than I have about ID. I just assumed ID was forcused more on origins than design. If what you quoted from Redlemon is really true, and not a misrepresentation, I agree that should not be taught in a scientific setting.
|
I wrote that description to be as value-neutral as possible. The eyeball always seems to be the primary ID example. Thanks for agreeing that ID is not suitable for science class.
Here's an excerpt from Wikipedia (which may contain bias, but seems fair to me):
Quote:
ntelligent Design is presented as an alternative to purely naturalistic forms of the theory of evolution. Its putative main purpose is to investigate whether or not the empirical evidence necessarily implies that life on Earth must have been designed by an intelligent agent or agents. William Dembski, one of Intelligent Design's leading proponents, has stated that the fundamental claim of Intelligent Design is that "there are natural systems that cannot be adequately explained in terms of undirected natural forces and that exhibit features which in any other circumstance we would attribute to intelligence."
Proponents of Intelligent Design claim that they look for evidence of what they call signs of intelligence — physical properties of an object that necessitate "design". The most common cited signs being considered include irreducible complexity, information mechanisms, and specified complexity. Many design proponents believe that living systems show one or more of these, from which they infer that life is designed. This stands in opposition to mainstream explanations of systems, which attempt to explain the natural world exclusively through impersonal physical processes such as random mutations and natural selection. Intelligent Design proponents claim that while evidence pointing to the nature of an "Intelligent Designer" may not be observable, its effects on nature can be detected. Dembski, in Signs of Intelligence claims "Proponents of Intelligent Design regard it as a scientific research program that investigates the effects of intelligent causes. Note that Intelligent Design studies the effects of intelligent causes and not intelligent causes per se". In his view, questions concerning the identity of a designer fall outside the realm of the idea.
|
I still fail to see how any form of an intelligent designer can be separated from the concept of a god.