A short guide to the difference
between evolution as a scientific theory and intelligent design
theory as a theistic belief.
Darwinian Evolution |
Intelligent Design |
Seeks a
natural explanation |
Seeks a
supernatural explanation |
Relies
on the scientific method |
Draws on
analogy to human artifacts |
Testable
|
Not testable
|
Theory
* |
Axiom ** |
Descent
with modification |
Irreducible
(specified) complexity ***
Some modification allowed, but not speciation |
Trial and
error design |
Planned
design |
Undirected
change (isotropic) |
Goal oriented,
hidden bias |
Mutations
and survival **** |
Unknown
(sic) creator |
Self-organization
|
Unknown
creator |
Microevolution |
Microevolution |
Speciation
(Macroevolution) |
Intelligent
design (creator) |
Function
follows form |
Form follows
function |
No purpose,
yet program dependent |
Engineering
to fit purpose |
Knowledge
through experimentation |
Knowledge
through faith |
Materialistic
belief |
Theistic
belief |
The creationist dispute of evolution is not solvable because creationist’s intention is the proof of God’s existence, while the biologist’s intention is the proof of a mechanism of function. Even if the creationists' solution that God creates organisms is tenable, the biologist still wants to know HOW? (not why). It is this HOW we came into existence that we teach in the class room, not the why of our existence. Thus, the question to ask is not if
God did it, but how did God do it? It is the IDs job to propose a mechanism. Did God snap her fingers, stir a stick in a pond, blew her breath over a barren desert?
* A scientific theory is a coherent
explanation of a collection of many facts in an internally consistent
manner (i.e., consistent with the theory). All known biological
facts are consistent with the theory of evolution. They are of
course also consistent with intelligent design, because everything
is consistent with the notion of a creator. Only the theory of
evolution offers physical mechanisms, intelligent design does
not (unknown creator).
** A statement accepted as true
as the basis for argument or inference (definition from
Merriam-Webster)
*** Irreducible complexity and
the relationship between order of a system and its information
content pose a critical challenge to evolutionary models of complexity.
While biologists offer testable hypotheses through models of molecular
evolution, intelligent design theory offers no mechanism other
than a creator or the presence of mind. The question is when and
how the creator intervenes and produces evolutionary changes or
novel irreducibly complex structures. No testable solution to
this question is even suggested by supporters of intelligent design
other than saying that intelligent design itself is the solution
to these questions. The real issue is the analogy to human artifacts;
we know how humans make a machine or encode information (writing),
but we do not know, and ID proponents do not tell us, how an unspecified
intelligence [mind, God, creator ... pick your choice] makes a
living organism. (see talkdesign.org
for an arguments demystifying irreducible complexity)
**** Survival is measured by
the number of individuals in the next generation (offspring) that
themselves have offspring. Survival depends, among other things,
on natural selection (e.g. infertility, disease), geographic isolation
and chance elimination (natural catastrophe, accidents etc.) and
is not about survival of the fittest; otherwise diseases would
have been eliminated a long time ago.
back
H
o m e
Copyright © 2000-2009
Lukas K. Buehler
|
|