Tag: The Positive Case for Design
How Do We Know Intelligent Design Is a Scientific “Theory”?
Let’s take the definition of “theory” given by ID’s most eminent scientific critics, and if ID meets that definition then there’s a good bet ID may properly be considered a scientific theory.
What Is a Proper Test of Intelligent Design?
Unfortunately, his misunderstandings lead Dennis Venema to set up an inaccurate method of testing of ID.
A Positive, Testable Case for Intelligent Design
The theory of intelligent design begins with observations of how intelligent agents act when designing things. By observing human intelligent agents, there is actually quite a bit we can learn know and understand about the actions of intelligent designers.
Does Intelligent Design Help Science Generate New Knowledge?
I was recently asked by an evolutionary biologist where ID can help science generate “new knowledge.” It’s important to realize that when dealing with historical sciences like neo-Darwinian evolution or intelligent design, new knowledge takes the form of both practical insights into the workings of biology in the present day (which can lead to insights into fighting disease), as well as taking the form of new knowledge about biological history and the origin of natural structures. In this regard, I could not disagree more with suggestions that ID closes off inquiry and does not lead to new scientific knowledge. Below are about a dozen or so examples of areas where ID is helping science to generate new knowledge. Each example Read More ›
Intelligent Design explains and unifies data from across the spectrum of scientific fields
Previously I noted that BioLogos has created a taxonomy of various viewpoints in the debate over origins that First Things blogger Christopher Benson called “helpful”. Given how badly it misrepresents ID, in my view it is anything but. Previously I showed that ID finds its supporting evidence in the fields of cosmology/physics and biology, thus refuting BioLogos’s mistaken assertion that “Intelligent design (ID) proponents believe that much of modern science is wrong and must be rejected because of its naturalism.” Let me reiterate two more points I made in response Benson’s orginal post: 2. The BioLogos taxonomy states: “The term Intelligent Design, although appropriated by these science critics, is used in many ways and is embraced by the first 5 Read More ›