Pro Con position paper
milenarojas90
Intelligentdesign.docxIntelligent design
The theory of intelligent design has several precedents and fits broadly into the philosophy of creationism. Unlike other creationist arguments, however, it is ostensibly based on scientific arguments which both argue for the existence and work of God while also pointing out discrepancies in evolutionary theory. Its proponents view intelligent design as an antidote to the godless, materialist trends in American science and society as well as a satisfactory conflation of science and spiritualism.
The vast majority of the scientific community is opposed to intelligent design. Critics argue that it is based on shoddy scientific arguments and that it attempts to reconcile two mutually exclusive bodies of human thought, science and religion. While they concede that evolutionary theory has not been proven totally and that gaps in the evolutionary record exist, they argue that science has amassed a terrific amount of knowledge on these matters and is successfully working to fill in the gaps.
Intelligent design has become a mainstay of the so-called "culture wars" which have erupted in the U.S. and have seen once-marginal ideas move further into mainstream politics. Proposals to teach it alongside evolutionary theory in public schools have proved the most controversial aspect of the debate.
Creationism: The idea that a supreme being created the earth and all of its life forms as recounted in the biblical book of Genesis. It disputes the age of the earth argued for by science, believing it to be much younger, and stands against the evolution of life forms.
Evolutionary Theory: A theory which posits that life on earth shares a common antecedent and that its diversity and complexity can be explained by random mutation and the natural selection of inheritable traits over the course of generations. Its first proponent was the British naturalist Charles Darwin, in the nineteenth century. Twentieth-century science expanded and deepened the theory and, according to many scientists, accurately detailed the operation of evolutionary mechanisms.
First Cause: A theological argument that assigns agency in the form of a creator to explain the cause of the universe and life on earth. Materialism: The philosophy that only matter exists and makes up reality.
Modern Synthesis: A combination of evolutionary theory and genetics that occurred in the 1930s and continues to dominate scientific thought.
The discovery and study of fossils made for one of the first challenges to the biblical account of Creation as related in the book of Genesis. In the nineteenth century, new knowledge about the age of fossils and the earth inspired several attempts to reconcile science and religious beliefs. One attempt, the day-age theory, argued that the six days of Creation were in fact six ages rather than twenty-hour periods. Other thinkers of the period continued to advocate a literal interpretation of the Bible.
Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection (1859) engendered a concerted reaction among devout Christians. Notably, Darwin at first conceded the possibility that biological life arose by the will of an unnamed force; he would soon recant this viewpoint, however, and state that evolutionary theory was adequate to explain the rise of life on earth and its great complexity without recourse to theology, even if it could not explain first cause. The Bible-based theories that challenged Darwinian thought resembled those of the previous decades, and represent the precursors of the intelligent design movement.
As science progressed into the twentieth century, evolutionary theory became increasingly accepted by both the scientific community and the general public. The modern synthesis and major discoveries in population genetics and biochemistry deepened and extended Darwin's theory. While scientists did not state that the processes of evolution were proven completely, they argued that the theory proved to be the best description of natural, observable phenomena and their changes over time as borne out in numerous controlled experiments.
Creationists persisted in their theories but were generally marginalized by the scientific and rationalist trends of Western society. The US, however, was atypical of industrial countries insofar as Christianity continued to exert significant influence on the culture and challenge the dominant scientific and social paradigms. One such example was The Genesis Flood (1961) by John C. Whitcomb Jr. and Henry M. Morris, a book that became the foundation for the Creation Research Society.
The book was influential on the burgeoning evangelical movement but was roundly dismissed by scientists. It sought to reconcile the biblical account of the earth's creation with modern geological evidence, arguing that the earth was much younger than evolutionary theory had deduced.
The theories espoused by creationists were at first substantially Christian. A later trend was to remove references to the Bible and to any particular god. Rather than aiming to supplant evolutionary theory, creationists sought to have their theory taught alongside Darwin's theory in public schools.
Intelligent design is rooted in these movements but its proponents have attempted to disassociate it from them. The movement has its origins in a 1987 setback, when a Supreme Court decision, Edwards v. Aguillard, banned the teaching of creationism in public schools because it was religious in nature and thus violated the separation of church and state. Intelligent design was a new strategy that accentuated the scientific principles upon which it was based in order to promote the idea of a supreme consciousness behind the creation of life and the universe.
The theory of intelligent design does not advocate a literal interpretation of the Bible nor is it affiliated with any single religion, though its proponents are generally conservative Christians. It also has a more sophisticated relationship to evolutionary theory than its predecessors. It does not deny that evolution has occurred, but it does point out that the theory fails to explain first cause as well as biological complexity.
One of the main contentions of intelligent design is that evolutionary theory has not explained complexity at the level of biochemistry. A process that leads to such complex organisms cannot have occurred without guidance, supporters argue. At the very least, a superior intelligence would have had to create the first cell before evolution could begin. Biologists counter that evolution can lead to such complexity, but proponents of intelligent design argue in turn that biologists have failed to plot out the process convincingly.
Another contention is that complexity cannot arise from randomness alone. This viewpoint is based on the argument that mathematical probability dictates that complex systems do not arise merely by chance. Therefore, a supreme intelligence must be present to guide the process. Both mathematicians and scientists, however, have pointed out that the mathematics involved in demonstrating this point have been misapplied and do not disprove anything about evolutionary processes.
Unlike most of the previous faith-based movements, intelligent design has the support and guidance of several scientists and intellectuals. Foremost among them are the biochemist Michael Behe and mathematician William Dembski. Behe's major contribution was Darwin's Black Box (1996) and Dembski's was The Design Inference (1998). Their ideas have been promoted by the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture, a conservative think tank, and by one of the movement's founders, Phillip E. Johnson.
One of the stated goals of the Discovery Institute is to promote the theory of intelligent design in the political and social spheres as a way to counter the dominance of evolutionary theory, which they believe promotes atheism and materialism. Its proponents aim to reintroduce what they view as lost Christian values through scientific inquiry and publicity. The movement has received significant attention since 2000 and has made some headway in establishing its ideas within the popular and political culture of the US. As of 2008, about half of the adults in the US say that they doubt evolution, which means that acceptance of the science behind evolution is lower in the US than in any other developed country besides Turkey.
Political commentators have noted the rise of the religious right during the presidency of George W. Bush. Though Christianity and politics have often been intertwined in American culture, the Bush administration has funded faith-based initiatives more profoundly than any previous president. Moreover, President Bush has remarked that he supports the teaching of intelligent design alongside evolutionary theory in public schools.
In 2004, the Dover Board of Education in Pennsylvania voted to include the teaching of intelligent design in high school biology classes. A year later, however, in the federal case Kitzmiller v. Dover, intelligent design was deemed creationism in disguise and banned from the classroom. Members of the school board were accused of promoting Christianity and violating the separation of church and state.
Scientists and other opponents of intelligent design hailed the decision, and continue to strongly criticize intelligent design while pointing out that none of the scientists that support it has yet to submit a research paper to a peer reviewed scientific journal. It is neither of scientific nor educational value, they argue, and state that if such a theory were to ever take root, the quality of science education in the US would be undermined. Despite this victory, a bill was introduced in Louisiana in 2008 to teach intelligent design into the classroom, and another introduced in Mississippi aimed to insert warnings about evolution into biology textbooks.
In 2011 and 2012, a number of state laws were proposed in an attempt to allow the teaching of intelligent design in the classroom. On March 9, 2011, for example, Texas introduced a bill that would have prohibited a school to penalize a teacher or student in regards to their research on intelligent design. The bill, however, died on May 30, 2011. On April 10, 2012, a new law in Tennessee was passed that allows the discussion of intelligent design in science classrooms. The law circumvents the separation of church and state by allowing teachers to present intelligent design only in conjunction with alternative theories, such as evolution. In April 2014, the Louisiana State Senate voted to uphold a similar law, allowing science teachers to introduce “supplemental materials” which challenge conventional scientific theory. As of late 2014, several other states had similar bills pending voting, including Virginia and Indiana.
Books
Fuller, Steve. Science v. Religion? Intelligent Design and the Problem of Evolution. Malden: Polity, 2007. Print.
Goldberg, Michelle. Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism. New York: Norton, 2006. Print.
Greenawalt, Kent. Does God Belong in Public Schools? Princeton: Princeton UP, 2005. Print.
Haarsma, Deborah B., and Loren D. Haarsma. Origins: Christian Perspectives on Creation, Evolution, and Intelligent Design. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Faith Alive, 2011. Print.
Jantzen, Benjamin C. An Introduction to Design Arguments. New York: Cambridge UP, 2014. Print.
Paxton, Mark. Media Perspectives on Intelligent Design and Evolution. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO, 2013. Print.
Periodicals
Bathija, Sandhya. "Creationism's Evolving Strategy." Church & State Jan. 2011: 11–13. Points of View Reference Center. Web. 19 Oct. 2015. http://search.ebscohost.com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/login.Aspx?direct=true&db=pwh&AN=57348119&site=pov-live.
Bissen, Diane. "Is Evolution Truly Random? Chance as an Ideological Weapon in the 'Evolution-Creation' Debate." Science & Christian Belief 26.2 (2014): 120–42. Academic Search Complete. Web. 28 Oct. 2015. http://search.ebscohost.com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=99355029&site=ehost-live.
Branch, Glenn. "Intelligent Design Is Not Science, and Should Not Join Evolution in the Classroom." US News & World Report. US News & World Report, 2 Feb. 2009. Web. 19 Oct. 2015. http://www.usnews.com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/articles/opinion/2009/02/02/intelligent-design-is-not-science-and-should-not-take-the-place-of-evolution-in-the-classroom.html.
Frykholm, Amy. "God in Evolution." Christian Century 12 Feb. 2008: 20–21. Academic Search Complete. Web. 20 Oct. 2015. http://search.ebscohost.com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=30032298&site=ehost-live.
Honey, P. Lynne. "Why I Teach the Controversy: Using Creationism to Teach Critical Thinking." Frontiers in Psychology 6.793 (2015): n. pag. Academic Search Complete. Web. 28 Oct. 2015. http://search.ebscohost.com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=108537595&site=ehost-live.
Jonas, Gabrielle. "A Textbook Case of Anti-Science." Newsweek Global 14 Feb. 2014: 83–87. Points of View Reference Center. Web. 20 Oct. 2015. http://search.ebscohost.com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=pwh&AN=94445263&site=pov-live.
Meredith, Stephen. "Looking for God in All the Wrong Places." First Things Feb. 2014: 47–52. Academic Search Complete. Web. 20 Oct. 2015. http://search.ebscohost.com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=93458086&site=ehost-live.
Ravitch, Frank S. "Law, Religion and Science: Determining the Role Religion Plays in Shaping Scientific Inquiry in Constitutional Democracies; The Case of Intelligent Design." Contemporary Readings in Law and Social Justice 4.1 (2012): 191–204. Academic Search Complete. Web. 20 Oct. 2015. http://search.ebscohost.com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=80158218&site=ehost-live.
Rope Kojonen, Erkki Vesa. "Tensions in Intelligent Design's Critique of Theistic Evolutionism." Zygon 48.2 (2013): 251–73. Academic Search Complete. Web. 20 Oct. 2015. http://search.ebscohost.com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=87857941&site=ehost-live.
These essays and any opinions, information, or representations contained therein are the creation of the particular author and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of EBSCO Information Services.
~~~~~~~~
By Michael Aliprandini
Co-Author: Katherine Walker
Katherine Walker earned a BA in art history from the University of Virginia, an MS in sociology from Virginia Commonwealth University, and a PhD in sociology from the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. She has taught at the University of Massachusetts, the University of Richmond, the College of William and Mary, and the University College of Virginia Commonwealth University. Her articles have been published in Qualitative Sociology and American Nineteenth Century History, and she has written multiple essays for EBSCO's Research Starters-Sociology.
Copyright of Points of View: Intelligent Design is the property of Lakeside Publishing Group, LLC and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
