12.2 Intelligent design and creationism

Intelligent design and creationism challenge evolutionary theory, arguing for a designer's role in life's complexity. These views reject scientific consensus on Earth's age and evolution, sparking debates on the nature of science and its relationship with religion.

Courts have ruled against teaching these ideas as science in public schools. This highlights ongoing tensions between scientific understanding, religious beliefs, and education policy. The controversy raises deep questions about the origins of life and the universe.

Intelligent Design vs Creationism

Defining Intelligent Design

Top images from around the web for Defining Intelligent Design

• 

  Talk:List of topics characterized as pseudoscience/Archive 16 - Wikipedia View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Philosophy of Biology: The analysis of living systems can generate both knowledge and illusions ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Biological Complexity: From Molecules to Systems @ UCL | Flickr View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Talk:List of topics characterized as pseudoscience/Archive 16 - Wikipedia View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Philosophy of Biology: The analysis of living systems can generate both knowledge and illusions ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

Top images from around the web for Defining Intelligent Design

• 

  Talk:List of topics characterized as pseudoscience/Archive 16 - Wikipedia View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Philosophy of Biology: The analysis of living systems can generate both knowledge and illusions ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Biological Complexity: From Molecules to Systems @ UCL | Flickr View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Talk:List of topics characterized as pseudoscience/Archive 16 - Wikipedia View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Philosophy of Biology: The analysis of living systems can generate both knowledge and illusions ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

• Intelligent design is the belief that certain features of the universe and living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection
• Does not identify the intelligent cause, nor does it state the cause is supernatural
• Proponents argue that certain biological features are too complex to have evolved naturally and thus require an intelligent designer (bacterial flagellum, blood clotting cascade)
• The scientific community considers intelligent design a pseudoscience as it does not propose testable scientific hypotheses or identify the nature of the designer

Defining Creationism

• Creationism is the religious belief that the universe and life originated from specific acts of divine creation, as in the biblical account, rather than by natural processes such as evolution
• Young Earth creationism interprets Genesis literally as six 24-hour days, while Old Earth creationism accepts geological findings and other methods of dating the earth
• Creationists reject evolution and common descent based on a literal interpretation of the Book of Genesis
• They argue for the separate creation of "kinds" of organisms (cats, dogs), the global flood, and a young Earth

Similarities and Differences

• Both intelligent design and creationism reject the scientific consensus on the age of the Earth and evolution, in favor of the involvement of a preexisting intelligence in the development of the universe and life
• However, intelligent design avoids explicitly identifying this intelligence, while creationism openly attributes it to the Abrahamic God
• Intelligent design focuses on arguing for the necessity of a designer based on the complexity of biological features, while creationism relies more heavily on a literal interpretation of scripture
• Creationism makes specific claims about the age of the Earth and the occurrence of a global flood, while intelligent design is less committed to these ideas

Scientific Merits of Intelligent Design and Creationism

Critiques of Intelligent Design

• Intelligent design proponents do not propose testable scientific hypotheses or identify the nature of the designer, making it unfalsifiable
• The concept of irreducible complexity, often used to argue for intelligent design, has been refuted by the identification of evolutionary pathways for supposedly irreducibly complex structures (bacterial flagellum, blood clotting cascade)
• Many features claimed to be intelligently designed have suboptimal or flawed aspects more consistent with natural selection than design (vertebrate eye, human spine)
• Intelligent design relies on negative arguments against evolution rather than positive evidence for design, often misrepresenting evolutionary theory (claiming evolution is random or cannot produce complex structures)

Critiques of Creationism

• Creationists' claims contradict abundant scientific evidence from geology, cosmology, and biology supporting an old Earth and evolution (radiometric dating, cosmic microwave background, fossil record, genetic similarity between species)
• The idea of separate creation of "kinds" is refuted by observed speciation events and the continuous spectrum of similarities and differences between species
• There is no scientific evidence for a global flood as described in Genesis, and many features of Earth's geology and biogeography contradict this idea (continuous ice core records, biogeographic distribution patterns)
• Creationists often misrepresent or selectively quote scientific findings to support their views, ignoring the broader context and consensus of the scientific community

Limitations of Both Views

• Both intelligent design and creationism rely on negative arguments against evolution rather than positive evidence for design
• They often misrepresent evolutionary theory, such as claiming that evolution is random or that it cannot produce complex structures
• In reality, evolution involves non-random selection acting on random mutation, and complex features can evolve gradually through intermediates
• Neither view offers a testable scientific alternative to evolutionary theory that can explain the observed patterns of similarity and diversity among living things

Legal and Educational Controversies

Court Cases in the United States

• In the United States, several court cases have ruled that teaching creationism or intelligent design in public school science classes violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, representing an unconstitutional promotion of particular religious beliefs
• Relevant cases include Epperson v. Arkansas (1968) which overturned a ban on teaching evolution, McLean v. Arkansas (1982) which ruled that creation science is not science, Edwards v. Aguillard (1987) which struck down a law requiring equal time for creation science, and Kitzmiller v. Dover (2005) which found that intelligent design is not science and cannot be taught in public school science classes

Continued Efforts to Undermine Evolution Education

• Despite these rulings, lawmakers and school boards in various states and districts have repeatedly attempted to undermine or remove the teaching of evolution in favor of creationism or intelligent design
• Tactics have included "balanced treatment" laws requiring equal time for creationism, textbook disclaimers questioning the validity of evolution, and "academic freedom" bills allowing teachers to critique evolution
• Advocates of creationism and intelligent design argue that excluding their views from science education infringes on free speech, religious freedom, and academic freedom
• However, courts have found that avoiding government endorsement of religion takes precedence, and that these views do not qualify as science

Opposition from the Scientific and Educational Communities

• The scientific and educational communities overwhelmingly oppose teaching creationism or intelligent design as science, as it would misrepresent the nature and findings of science
• Major organizations that have issued statements to this effect include the National Academy of Sciences, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and the National Science Teachers Association
• Teaching these views as science would confuse students about the scientific method and the nature of scientific evidence, and could hinder their understanding of important concepts in biology and other fields
• Educators and scientists argue that religious ideas can be discussed in appropriate contexts such as comparative religion or philosophy classes, but do not belong in science classes

Philosophical and Theological Implications

Questions Raised by Intelligent Design

• Intelligent design implies that certain features of the universe and life are best explained by an undirected, intelligent cause, raising philosophical questions about the nature and identity of the designer
• What is the designer's nature and identity? Is it a personal God, an impersonal force, or something else entirely?
• What are the designer's methods and motives? Why did it choose to design some things but not others?
• How can we reconcile an intelligent designer with the apparent imperfections and inefficiencies in nature?
• Intelligent design proponents generally avoid addressing these questions, focusing instead on arguing against evolution

Theistic Evolution and Its Challenges

• Theistic evolution is the belief that God creates through the process of evolution, allowing for acceptance of scientific findings while still maintaining belief in divine providence
• This view is held by many religious scientists and theologians, including some prominent figures in the Catholic Church and mainline Protestant denominations
• However, intelligent design and creationism reject theistic evolution as incompatible with their views of direct divine intervention
• They argue that evolution removes God's active role in creation and reduces living things to the products of blind, undirected processes
• Theistic evolutionists counter that evolution can be seen as a tool used by God to create, and that the apparent randomness of mutation and natural selection does not preclude divine guidance

The Problem of Natural Evil

• The problem of natural evil challenges the idea of an all-good, all-powerful designer, asking why an intelligent creator would make a world with so much apparent cruelty and waste
• Examples include predation, parasitism, extinction, birth defects, and natural disasters that cause immense suffering in humans and animals alike
• If nature was intelligently designed, why does it seem so indifferent to the well-being of living things?
• Theodicy attempts to reconcile God's benevolence with the existence of evil, but no fully satisfactory solution has been found
• Some argue that natural evils are necessary for the proper functioning of the world or the development of moral character, but these explanations are often seen as inadequate in the face of extreme suffering

Implications for Science and Religion

• Intelligent design and creationism have implications for the relationship between science and religion, with some seeing them as a necessary integration of scientific and spiritual truths
• Proponents argue that purely naturalistic science is inherently limited and cannot account for the deepest questions of meaning and purpose
• However, critics see intelligent design and creationism as a rejection of methodological naturalism and a return to God-of-the-gaps reasoning, undermining the basis of scientific inquiry
• They argue that science and religion are separate domains that answer different questions and operate under different epistemological rules
• Attempts to blend the two often result in bad science and bad theology, distorting both in the process
• Many scientists and theologians advocate for a model of non-overlapping magisteria (NOMA) where science and religion coexist peacefully by staying within their respective domains of factual investigation and moral/spiritual reflection