Who's Afraid of ID? A Survey of the Intelligent Design Movement

doi:10.1017/CBO9780511804823.004

3 - Who's Afraid of ID? A Survey of the Intelligent Design Movement

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2012

Angus Menuge

Edited by

William A. Dembski and

Michael Ruse

Show author details

Angus Menuge: Affiliation:
Associate professor of philosophy and program associate of the Cranach Institute, Concordia University Wisconsin
William A. Dembski: Affiliation:
Baylor University, Texas
Michael Ruse: Affiliation:
Florida State University

Book contents

Get access

Summary

A SURVEY OF THE INTELLIGENT DESIGN MOVEMENT

Intelligent Design (ID) argues that intelligent causes are capable of leaving empirically detectable marks in the natural world. Aspiring to be a scientific research program, ID purports to study the effects of intelligent causes in biology and cosmology. It claims that the best explanation for at least some of the appearance of design in nature is that this design is actual. Specifically, certain kinds of complex information found in the natural world are said to point convincingly to the work of an intelligent agency. Yet for many scientists, any appearance of design in nature ultimately derives from the interplay of undirected natural forces. What's more, ID flies in the face of the methodological naturalism (MN) that prevails throughout so much of science. According to MN, although scientists are entitled to religious beliefs and can entertain supernatural entities in their off time, within science proper they need to proceed as if only natural causes are operative.

As compared to its distinguished colleagues – Darwinism, self-organization, and theistic evolution – Intelligent Design is the new kid on the block. Bursting onto the public scene in the 1990s, ID was greeted with both enthusiastic acceptance and strong opposition. For some, ID provides a more inclusive and open framework for knowledge that reconnects science with questions of value and purpose. For others, ID represents the latest incarnation of creationism, a confusion of religion and science that falsifies both.

Type: Chapter
Information: Debating Design
From Darwin to DNA
, pp. 32 - 52

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511804823.004 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Arnhart, L. 1998. Darwinian Natural Right: The Biological Ethics of Human Nature. Albany: State University of New York Press

Behe, M. 1996. Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution. New York: The Free Press

Behe, M. 2000a. Correspondence with science journals: Response to critics concerning peer-review. Available at <http://www.discovery.org/viewDB/index.php3?program=CRSC%20Responses&command=view&id=450>

Behe, M. 2000b. Self-organization and irreducibly complex systems: A reply to Shanks and Joplin. Philosophy of Science 67:1: 155–62CrossRef Google Scholar

Behe, M. 2001. The modern intelligent design hypothesis. Philosophia Christi 3(1): 165–79Google Scholar

Behe, M., W. Dembski, and S. Meyer. (eds.) 2000. Science and Evidence for Design in the Universe. San Francisco: Ignatius Press

Bradley, W., R. Olsen, and C. Thaxton. 1984. The Mystery of Life's Origin: Reassessing Current Theories. New York: Philosophical Library

Brooke, J., and M. Osler. (eds.) 2001. Science in theistic contexts: Cognitive dimensions. Osiris 16 (special edition)

Cairns-Smith, A. G. 1971. The Life Puzzle. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd

Caplan, A. 1991. Creationist belief precludes credibility on science issues. The Scientist, February 18, available at <htttp://www.the-scientist.com/yr1991/feb/opin3_910218.html>Google Scholar

Coyne, J. 2001. Creationism by stealth. Nature 410 (April 12): 745–6CrossRef Google Scholar

Darwin, C. 1859. On the Origin of Species. London: John Murray

Dawkins, R. 1996. The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe without Design, 2nd ed. New York: Norton

Dembski, W. 1998a. The Design Inference: Eliminating Chance through Small Probabilities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Dembski, W. (ed.) 1998b. Mere Creation: Science, Faith and Intelligent Design. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press

Dembski, W. 1999. Intelligent Design: The Bridge between Science and Theology. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press

Dembski, W. 2002. No Free Lunch: Why Specified Complexity Cannot Be Purchased without Intelligence. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield

Dennett, D. 1995. Darwin's Dangerous Idea. New York: Simon and Schuster

Denton, M. 1986. Evolution: A Theory in Crisis. Chevy Chase, MD: Adler and Adler

Denton, M. 1998. Nature's Destiny: How the Laws of Physics Reveal Purpose in the Universe. New York: The Free Press

Dobzhansky, T. 1965. Discussion of a paper by G. Schramm. In The Origins of Prebiological Systems and of Their Molecular Matrices, ed. S. W. Fox. New York: Academic Press, p. 310

Easterbrook, G. 1997. Science and God: A warming trend?Science 277: 890–3CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Forrest, B. 2001. The Wedge at work: How intelligent design creationism is wedging its way into the cultural and academic mainstream. In Intelligent Design Creationism and Its Critics, ed. R. Pennock. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 5–53

Forrest, B., and P. Gross. 2003. Creationism's Trojan Horse: The Wedge of Intelligent Design. New York: Oxford University Press

Harrison, P. 1998. The Bible, Protestantism, and the Rise of Natural Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Hume, D. 1779. Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion. Oxford: Clarendon Press

Hunter, C. 2001. Darwin's God: Evolution and the Problem of Evil. Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos Press

Jaki, S. 2000. The Savior of Science. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans

Johnson, Phillip. 1991. Darwin on Trial. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press

Johnson, Phillip. 1995. Reason in the Balance. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press

Johnson, Phillip. 2000. The Wedge of Truth: Splitting the Foundations of Naturalism. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press

Kenyon, D., and G. Steinman. 1969. Biochemical Predestination. New York: McGraw Hill

Koons, R. 2000. The incompatibility of naturalism and scientific realism. In Natu-ralism: A Critical Analysis, ed. W. L. Craig and J. P. Moreland. New York: Routledge, pp. 49–63

McDonald, J. 2002. A reducibly complex mousetrap. Available at <http://udel.edu/∼mcdonald/oldmousetrap.html>

Menuge, A. 2001. Few signs of intelligence: The saga of Bill Dembski at Baylor. Touchstone (May): 54–5Google Scholar

Meyer, S. 1993. “Danger: Indoctrination. A Scopes Trial for the ‘90s.” The Wall Street Journal, December 6, p. A14. Available online from the “Article Database” at <www.discovery.org>Google Scholar

Meyer, S. 2000. Evidence for design in physics and biology: From the origin of the universe to the origin of life. In Science and Evidence for Design in the Universe, ed. M. Behe, W. Dembski, and S. Meyer. San Francisco: Ignatius Press, pp. 53–111

Meyer, S. 2001. Darwin in the dock. Touchstone (April): 57–9. Available on-line from the articles database at <www.touchstonemag.com>Google Scholar

Miller, K. 1999. Finding Darwin's God: A Scientist's Search for Common Ground between God and Evolution. New York: HarperCollins

Nelson, P. 1996. The role of theology in current evolutionary reasoning. Biology and Philosophy 11(4): 493–517. Reprinted in Pennock 2001, pp. 677–704CrossRef Google Scholar

Orr, H. A. 1996/97. Darwin v. intelligent design (again). Boston Review (December/January): 28–31. Available at <http://bostonreview.mit.edu/br21.6/orr.html>Google Scholar

Osler, M. (ed.) Rethinking the Scientific Revolution. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2000

Pearcey, N. and C. Thaxton. 1994. The Soul of Science: Christian Faith and Natural Philosophy. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books

Pennock, R. 1999. Tower of Babel: The Evidence against the New Creationism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Pennock, R. (ed.) 2001. Intelligent Design Creationism and Its Critics: Philosophical, Theological, and Scientific Perspectives. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Plantinga, A. 1993. Warrant and Proper Function. New York: Oxford University Press

Plantinga, A. 2000. Warranted Christian Belief. New York: Oxford University Press

Ratzsch, D. 2001. Nature, Design, and Science: The Status of Design in Natural Science. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press

Rea, M. 2000. Naturalism and material objects. In Naturalism: A Critical Analysis, ed. W. L. Craig and J. P. Moreland. New York: Routledge, pp. 110–32

Ruse, M. 2001. Can a Darwinian Be a Christian? The Relationship between Science and Religion. New York: Cambridge University Press

Scott, E. 2001. Fatally flawed iconoclasm. Science 292 (June 22): 2257–8CrossRef Google Scholar

Shanks, N. and Joplin, K.. 1999. Redundant complexity: A critical analysis of intelligent design in biochemistry. Philosophy of Science 66: 268–82CrossRef Google Scholar

Stanley, S. 1979. Macroevolution. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman

Ussery, D. 2001. The stealth creationists. Skeptic 8(4): 72–4Google Scholar

Wells, J. 2000. Icons of Evolution: Science or Myth? Why Much of What We Teach about Evolution Is Wrong. Washington, DC: Regnery

Wells, J. 2002. Catch 23. Available at <http://www.discovery.org/viewDB/index.php3?program=CRSC&command=view&id=1212>

Wiker, B. 2002. Moral Darwinism: How We Became Hedonists. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press