What is ID?

Jimmy D · Apr 11, 2017

I notice that there are a few posters with ID in their usernames or signatures and a few posters who regularly try and promote or defend intelligent design.

Intelligent Design
Intelligent design refers to a scientific research program as well as a community of scientists, philosophers and other scholars who seek evidence of design in nature. The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection. Through the study and analysis of a system's components, a design theorist is able to determine whether various natural structures are the product of chance, natural law, intelligent design, or some combination thereof.

I'm curious as to what ID proponents actually believe ID is, so I've got a few questions if anyone would care to explain it to me. Can we please avoid apologetics, religious views or badmouthing other scientific fields, if ID is to stand on it's own merits as an area of scientific research we should treat it as such.

What are the proposed mechanisms of design?

How can it be falsified?

How does ID explain the diversity of life on Earth?

If it was established that ID is infact a valid scientific field what would be it's practical applications?

How does it explain the fossil record?

Are there any examples of reasearch being carried out or published papers?

For the sake of discussion can I ask that the dichotomy of TOE vs ID be avoided in as much as 'disproving' one does nothing to legitimize the other.

Thanks.

Gene Parmesan · Apr 11, 2017

Jimmy D said:
Intelligent Design
Intelligent design refers to a scientific research program as well as a community of scientists, philosophers and other scholars who seek evidence of design in nature.

I still would like someone to answer how you can identify design if literally everything is designed? How can you know what design looks like if you don't know what not designed looks like?

AV1611VET · Apr 11, 2017

Gene Parmesan said:
I still would like someone to answer how you can identify design if literally everything is designed?

By the blueprints?

Gene Parmesan · Apr 11, 2017

AV1611VET said:
By the blueprints?

May I ask for an example of something that is not designed?

AV1611VET · Apr 11, 2017

Gene Parmesan said:
May I ask for an example of something that is not designed?

Chaos?

Gene Parmesan · Apr 11, 2017

AV1611VET said:
Chaos?

Can you give me an example of something that "chaos" describes?

AirPo · Apr 11, 2017

Gene Parmesan said:
Can you give me an example of something that "chaos" describes?

Any of AV's challenge threads.

Jimmy D · Apr 11, 2017

It seems the ID proponentsists have gone a bit shy.

pitabread · Apr 11, 2017

Gene Parmesan said:
I still would like someone to answer how you can identify design if literally everything is designed? How can you know what design looks like if you don't know what not designed looks like?

I find a lot of the time (if not all of the time) people argue that everything looks designed, it's usually a purely emotional argument. I.e. "Everything looks so amazing and complex and wonderful! Can't you see it too? It's obviously the result of a supreme intelligence!"

But there's nothing to really discuss or debate when it comes to a purely emotional argument. Hence a lot of these discussions go nowhere.

pitabread · Apr 11, 2017

Jimmy D said:
It seems the ID proponentsists have gone a bit shy.

The cynic in me believes that most ID proponents are less familiar with ID than their opponents are.

xianghua · Apr 11, 2017

Gene Parmesan said:
I still would like someone to answer how you can identify design if literally everything is designed? How can you know what design looks like if you don't know what not designed looks like?

a sand dune looks design?

Gene Parmesan · Apr 11, 2017

xianghua said:
a sand dune looks design?

To me? No, it doesn't look intelligently designed. You?

Jimmy D · Apr 12, 2017

xianghua said:
a sand dune looks design?

Hi Xianghua, you've got "ID" in your profile picture, can you shed any light on the OP?

Speedwell · Apr 12, 2017

There are no answers to your questions. ID is nothing but fraudulent pseudoscience concocted as a Trojan Horse for biblical creationism.

Jimmy D · Apr 12, 2017

I was actually hoping to discuss these things, no gotcha's or anything.

Sadly, it's been two days now and still nothing, I think we can take the silence as a tacit admission that ID is unscientific.

AV1611VET · Apr 12, 2017

Speedwell said:
There are no answers to your questions. ID is nothing but fraudulent pseudoscience concocted as a Trojan Horse for biblical creationism.

I agree.

xianghua · Apr 13, 2017

Jimmy D said:
Hi Xianghua, you've got "ID" in your profile picture, can you shed any light on the OP?

you have made 2 points:

"How can it be falsified?"-

im not sure but i do think that creationism can be falsified by showing an example of a creature that evolve into another creature (a cat to dog for instance).

also remember that a scientific claim can also be prove and not just disprove.

"If it was established that ID is infact a valid scientific field what would be it's practical applications? "-

yes:

Peer-Reviewed Articles Supporting Intelligent Design | Center for Science and Culture

Jimmy D · Apr 13, 2017

xianghua said:
you have made 2 points:

"How can it be falsified?"-

im not sure but i do think that creationism can be falsified by showing an example of a creature that evolve into another creature (a cat to dog for instance).

also remember that a scientific claim can also be prove and not just disprove.

"If it was established that ID is infact a valid scientific field what would be it's practical applications? "-

yes:

Peer-Reviewed Articles Supporting Intelligent Design | Center for Science and Culture

Thanks Xianghua.

I appreciate that you don't accept it but there are countless examples of evidence of creatures evolving, the whale example you've been shown for example. This is not really relevant though, you don't get evidence for your model by showing another model to be wrong, you need something that demonstrates that ID is correct.

I apologise for not having time to look at the Articles you linked, I'm under pressure at work today, I'll get back to it though.

pitabread · Apr 13, 2017

xianghua said:
im not sure but i do think that creationism can be falsified by showing an example of a creature that evolve into another creature (a cat to dog for instance).

A modern cat evolving into a modern dog is not how evolution works. Rather, both of those modern species would share common ancestry; and such a common ancestor would be neither a modern cat nor a modern dog.

Jimmy D · Apr 13, 2017

pitabread said:
A modern cat evolving into a modern dog is not how evolution works. Rather, both of those modern species would share common ancestry; and such a common ancestor would be neither a modern cat nor a modern dog.

You're right of course, but I was trying to steer him away from discussing evolution.

What is ID?

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Well-Known Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Well-Known Member

with a Touch of Grey

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency