Is ID based on science? If not it has no place in a science subject. Topics like ID are what philosophy and theology classes are for.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Intelligent Design is not creationism
- Thread starter Teleologist
- Start date
There's a fine line between being in denial and being a liar.Quote from Teleologist:
Nonsense. ID doesn't invoke an omnipotent Creator, is not based on the Genesis account and isn't anti-evolution.
The ID aim quite clearly is to invoke all those things you list.
Discovery Institute , hub of the ID movement, states in its "wedge" manifesto, its aims and goals
omnipotent Creator:
"...the theistic understanding that nature and human beings are created by God"
based on the Genesis account:
replace it [science] with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions
anti-evolution:
" Debunking the traditional conceptions of both God and man, thinkers such as... Charles Darwin.........infected virtually every area of our culture, from politics and economics to literature and art,
Discovery Institute's Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture seeks nothing less than the overthrow of materialism and its cultural legacies "
Now, you can word play, spin, avoid, dodge and re-define, as ID always does. But to say Darwin "infected".... that is an ID refusal and denial through their own re-definition of science. They call that extremist view a "Renewal" of science.
Intelligent Design IS creationism IS christian fundamentalism.
I doubt Behe or Dembski or the Discovery Institute as a whole would be at all impressed with your self attributed ability..Quote from Teleologist:
My ID views go above and beyond the Discovery Institute.
I have the ability to tease apart the concept of ID from the ID movement
So indeed you are on the fringe, a sect ( how many members?...1? ) outside the mainstream ID /creationist movement.
A more appropriate title for your thread would now be "My personal version of Intelligent Design is not creationism"
....all that ability to focus and without consideration of theology, but not the ability it seems to focus without consideration of pseudo-science..Quote from Teleologist:
I have the ability to tease apart the concept of ID from the ID movement. I also have the ability to focus on ID without consideration of theology.
Nothing wrong with that at all, but In this thread, you do not seem to have what might appear to be a more useful ability, to avoid confusing those ID opinions with science.Quote from Teleologist:
There is nothing wrong, for example, with ID advocates having an opinion about the origin of life
Intermingling your personal version of ID , with scientifically observable natural events like Evolution which is not about the origin of life, IS disingenuous..
By unguided you mean natural ?Quote from Teleologist:
The problem of language-based, information-rich life was recognized completely apart from religious concerns, and it will take something other than an unguided process to solve it.
Then one's views will start and end in philosophy, not science. Slotting bits of ' science-redefined ' and ID / creationism in between, won't make turn it into science.Quote from Teleologist:
There is nothing disingenuous about the fact that oneâs views are (hopefully) larger than what science alone can tell us.
Stu wrote:
While ID critics continually conflate Intelligent Design with Creationism for rhetorical and political reasons, the creationists themselves do not consider ID proponents to be fellow creationists. No less than John Morris of the Institute for Creation Research, comments as follows:
Pure bunk. ID has nothing whatsoever to do with creationism. ID is not based on the Bible, does not invoke the supernatural, and is not anti-evolution.Intelligent Design IS creationism IS christian fundamentalism.
While ID critics continually conflate Intelligent Design with Creationism for rhetorical and political reasons, the creationists themselves do not consider ID proponents to be fellow creationists. No less than John Morris of the Institute for Creation Research, comments as follows:
The differences between Biblical creationism and the Intelligent Design Movement should become clear. As an unashamedly Christian/creationist organization, ICR is concerned with the reputation of our God and desires to point all men back to Him. We are not in this work merely to do good science, although this is of great importance to us. We care that students and society are brainwashed away from a relationship with their Creator/Savior. While all creationists necessarily believe in intelligent design, not all ID proponents believe in God. ID is strictly a non-Christian movement, and while ICR values and supports their work, we cannot join them.
"(snipped)While all creationists necessarily believe in intelligent design, not all ID proponents believe in God. ID is strictly a non-Christian movement, and while ICR values and supports their work, we cannot join them."
ID is a non-christian movement?
Holy illogic batman.
Premises:
1. All creationists necessarily believe in ID.
2. Not all ID proponents believe in God.
Let's add in some other essential premises and come to the most logical conclusion:
3. The gross majority of ID proponents are Christian.
4. The founders of the ID movement are Christian.
Conclusion:
ID is predominately, as in 99%, a Christian ideology because ID is based primarily on Christian creationism of one type or another. And with the majority of proponents being Christian, that would essentially make ID a Christian movement.
With that said, enjoy the next 8 months trying to ferret out the "generous" 1% I attributed to IDer's who are non-Christian to bolster the thread premise that ID is not creationism.
Or, optimistically, a new thread will be started titled, "Intelligent Design is not exclusively creationism."
ID is a non-christian movement?
Holy illogic batman.
Premises:
1. All creationists necessarily believe in ID.
2. Not all ID proponents believe in God.
Let's add in some other essential premises and come to the most logical conclusion:
3. The gross majority of ID proponents are Christian.
4. The founders of the ID movement are Christian.
Conclusion:
ID is predominately, as in 99%, a Christian ideology because ID is based primarily on Christian creationism of one type or another. And with the majority of proponents being Christian, that would essentially make ID a Christian movement.
With that said, enjoy the next 8 months trying to ferret out the "generous" 1% I attributed to IDer's who are non-Christian to bolster the thread premise that ID is not creationism.
Or, optimistically, a new thread will be started titled, "Intelligent Design is not exclusively creationism."
D2.0 wrote:
Wrong. Just because the majority of ID proponents are Christian it doesn't necessarily follow that ID is based primarily on creationism of one type or another. The majority of evolutionary biologists are atheists. Does that mean evolutionary biology is based on an atheistic ideology?
3. The gross majority of ID proponents are Christian.
4. The founders of the ID movement are Christian.
Conclusion:
ID is predominately, as in 99%, a Christian ideology because ID is based primarily on Christian creationism of one type or another.
Wrong. Just because the majority of ID proponents are Christian it doesn't necessarily follow that ID is based primarily on creationism of one type or another. The majority of evolutionary biologists are atheists. Does that mean evolutionary biology is based on an atheistic ideology?
Quote from D2.0:
"(snipped)While all creationists necessarily believe in intelligent design, not all ID proponents believe in God. ID is strictly a non-Christian movement, and while ICR values and supports their work, we cannot join them."
ID is a non-christian movement?
Holy illogic batman.
Premises:
1. All creationists necessarily believe in ID.
2. Not all ID proponents believe in God.
Let's add in some other essential premises and come to the most logical conclusion:
3. The gross majority of ID proponents are Christian.
4. The founders of the ID movement are Christian.
Conclusion:
ID is predominately, as in 99%, a Christian ideology because ID is based primarily on Christian creationism of one type or another. And with the majority of proponents being Christian, that would essentially make ID a Christian movement.
With that said, enjoy the next 8 months trying to ferret out the "generous" 1% I attributed to IDer's who are non-Christian to bolster the thread premise that ID is not creationism.
Or, optimistically, a new thread will be started titled, "Intelligent Design is not exclusively creationism."
Rather easy to come to any conclusion if you are allowed to make up your own numbers( 99% and 1%). Is that how you come to your evolutionary conclusion as well?