An Intelligent Discussion on Intelligent Design

1
An Intelligent Discussion on Intelligent Design

• Banners 2008
• March 10
• Dr. James F. Sennett
• Associate Professor of Philosophy
• Brenau University
• faculty.brenau.edu/jsennett

2
Introduction

• Who the heck is this?
• Neither theologian nor scientist
• A philosopher of all things!
• Why me?
• Key questions before usare philosophical
  questions.
• I have no axes to grind.
• Im not afraid.
• Im not mad.
• My agenda is truth.

Not afraid of evolution Not afraid of Intelligent
Design
Not mad at religion Not mad at science
3
Intelligent Design Advocates

• The famous and the infamous
• Phillip Johnson, Darwin on Trial
• Michael Behe, Darwins Black Box
• Michael Denton, Evolution A Theory in Crisis
• William Dembski
• PhD MathematicsPhD Philosophy
• Research professor,SW Baptist Theological
  Seminary
• Research fellow, Discovery Institute
• Theoretical and intellectual guru of ID
• Bare Bones ID

4
Bare Bones ID

• The Design Inference
• The Design Hypothesis
• The Three ID Questions
• The Bare Bones of Bare Bones ID

5
The Design Inference

• Dembski according to Sennett
• P1) Observations result from either causal
  regularity, unpredictable chance, or design.
• P2) Some observations can be shown empirically to
  result neither from causal regularity nor from
  unpredictable chance.
• C) Therefore, some observations can be shown to
  result from design.
• Valid argument (disjunctive syllogism)
• Are the premises true?
• Are the premises coherent?

6
The Design Hypothesis

• Three hypotheses
• O results from causal regularity.
• O results from unpredictable chance.
• O results from intelligent design.
• Three questions
• Is DH scientific?
• Can DH be a hypothesis?
• Is DH a scientific theory?
• Can DH ever be a scientific theory?

The DesignHypothesis (DH)
7
Hypothesis
Theory

• UnconfirmedPartially confirmedHighly confirmed

• Highly confirmed only

Very differentfrom ordinaryuses of theory
The theory of evolution is NOT just a theory.
8
Hypothesis
Theory

• UnconfirmedPartially confirmedHighly confirmed
• Judged by coherence with background information
• Specific to the observation(s) at hand

• Highly confirmed only
• Functions asbackground information
• Generalizable to whole classes of observations,
  possible observations

9
Our Three Questions

• Is DH a scientific theory?
• Definitely not
• Not enough time,not enough research,not enough
  confirmation
• Preliminary questions unsettled
• DH is not and cannot presently be a foundation
  for robust scientific research.
• Can it be the subject of robust scientific
  research?

10
Our Three Questions

• Can DH ever be a theory?
• Not any time soon
• Not enough time, research, confirmation
• Theories begin as research projects
• Source of needed time, etc.
• Can DH be a research project?
• It would seem so
• Details forthcoming
• Dependent on answerto remaining question

11
Our Three Questions

• Is DH scientific?
• Is DH a hypothesis?
• The central question of debate
• Design scientifically verifiedlack of causal
  regularity andunpredictable chance
• Is such scientific verification possible?
• Our primary concernfor the rest of the evening

12
The Bare Bones of Bare Bones ID

• ID is a scientific hypothesis.
• Therefore, ID can function as the subject of a
  scientific research project.
• Therefore, ID can, in principle, be established
  as a scientific theory.

Beyond herethere be dragons!
13
An Overview of ID

• What ID isnt
• What ID is
• What ID could be, but isnt

14
What ID Isnt

• ID isnt Scientific Creationism
• Not committed to young earth theory
• Not committed to flood geology
• Not committed to special creationism
• ID isnt Natural Theology
• Design as theoretical placeholder
• No claim to demonstration of deity

15
What ID Isnt

• ID isnt anti-evolution
• Evolution speciation vianatural selection
• Darwinism speciation via unguided natural
  selection
• ID isnt a threat to scientific inquiry

16
What ID Is

• A proposal for a scientific research project
  aimed at the confirmation(or disconfirmation) of
  DH.
• Preliminary stages of preliminary stages of
  hypothesis confirmation
• What would disconfirmation look like?
• Is confirmation/disconfirmation possible?

17
ID as Research Project

• Uncontrolled observation
• Design inference in everyday reasoning
• Design inference in science
• forensics, archaeology, SETI
• Darwinian parallel artificial selection

18
ID as Research Project

• Formalization and extension
• Development of an explanatory model for common
  design inferences
• Application of the model to new or extended cases
• Darwinian parallel natural selection

19
ID as Research Project

• The Explanatory Model
• Specified complexity
• Complex improbable rules out regularity
• Specified displays an independently given or
  objective pattern rules out chance
• Example Welcome to Lake Charles!
• SETI application

20
ID as Research Project

• Application of the model
• Behe irreducibly complexbiological systems
• Other ID projects
• ResearchID.org
• Biology, cosmology, paleontology
• Meta-theoretical research projects
• ID as information theory

21
What ID Could Be, but Isnt

• A pioneering force in modern science
• Challenging the limits of science
• Quantum physics, relativity theory, big bang
  cosmology, experimental psychology, actuarial
  science, cognitive science
• Can science see beyond the natural world?

22
Why Isnt It?

• ID Project a study in shooting oneself in ones
  own foot
• The focus on biological evolution
• Alignment with the Culture Wars crowd
• Intentional Misrepresentation
• Research project vs. theory
• The evolutionary whipping post
• Promoting the rhetoric of conflict

23
Some Friendly Suggestions

• Leave biology alone
• Cosmology, cognitive science,information theory
• Drop the Culture Wars crowd
• Abandon public education strategies
• Adopt an instrumentalist approach
• Designer as theoretical entity
• ID as cutting-edge, postmodern science

24
Conclusion

• Fear and loathing of ID is unjustified from a
  scientific and philosophical perspective.
• Fear and loathing of ID is perfectly
  understandable, perhaps even justifiable, from a
  civil liberties perspective.
• The good news a return to the lessons of history