The intelligent design theory

[krazeeboi]

We've been discussing this issue in two classes of mine recently and I want to see where you guys stand on the issue. For those who aren't fully informed of the issues, here's a quick rundown.

The "intelligent design" theory is a theory that says that the complexity in life forms that we see today could not have arisen through a process of small, cumulative changes throughout time (i.e., evolution), and thus an "intelligent designer" must be behind it all.

Those who oppose the theory being taught in science classes say that science is limited to naturalistic explanations of the material world that are subject to testability and predictable models. Since any type of "intelligent designer" (e.g., God, Allah, Shiva, Zoroaster, Zeus, etc.) cannot be empirically (physically) verified or tested, such an explanation that brings in this sort of element has no place in a science classroom. Philosophy or religion classes perhaps, but not a science classroom. This, however, does NOT mean that the people who adhere to such a view do not believe in intelligent design, or creationism; if they do, they do not believe that it has any place in the science classroom due to the nature of science.

So what do you guys think and why?

[lanl ns]

krazeeboi said:

The "intelligent design" theory is a theory that says that the complexity in life forms that we see today could not have arisen through a process of small, cumulative changes throughout time (i.e., evolution), and thus an "intelligent designer" must be behind it all.

This makes me laugh, because if this being was just intelligent that humankind could figure it out......

IMHO God is above our mere limited intelligence and I would not reduce him to an "intelligent designer"......

Bill Gates, Micheal Dell, George Washington Carver, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Banneker were intelligent
designers not God.........................

[krazeeboi]

LANL, I'm not sure I understand you here. The term "intelligent" here isn't used in the sense of being "brilliant" or a "genius," but rather a being that has intellect; this doesn't speak to the quality of the intellect though (althought it would have to be beyond what our minds can comprehend to ultimately be responsible for the complexity in life forms we see in the world today).

[auneeqsol]

Well I guess its trying to say the same thing that the bible is saying about creation, but its not owning up to the Creator. Them putting a label "intelligent designer" on it is just making it socially acceptable, without being in a religious arena.

One day ppl will own up to the truth.

[lanl ns]

Hi everyone, in order to make myself clear; I am saying that all these terms are used to name God everything else but Creator / God........

The term intelligent does not reflect God's intellect but neither does it gives him the honor of being the Supreme Being...................

Intelligent Design is P C for todays creation terminology, but I am lead to believe the Creation was a Miraculous Design created by a God of Miracles..................

[krazeeboi]

Actually, not all who accept the theory of intelligent design accept the Genesis creation account(s) as truth. Furthermore, this theory is actually being pushed, not just by some Christians, but also by some Jews, Muslims, and even Hindus. So for those who think that we need to teach that the Christian God is the "intelligent designer," what conflicts will this create with those who subscribe to a different religion? Does this not amount to an endorsement of a particular religion within public schools, which is fundamentally anti-constitutional?