Skip to main content
Non-financial boards have been closed.

Non-financial boards have been closed but will continue to be accessible in read-only form. If you're disappointed, we understand. Thank you for being an active participant in this community. We have more community features in development that we look forward to sharing soon. | The Motley Fool Community
Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
No. of Recommendations: 0
ID doesn't propose to test an undescribed intelligent designer. Only the artifacts of design.

But a test for design is not a test for intelligence. We already know that very complex design can arise from randomness, just look at Mandelbrot fractals.

Technically you are correct, though in the context of ID I'm using "design" to mean the arrangement of parts that in our experience only comes from intelligence, ie intelligent design. But you are right to point out the ambiguity. I should have said " . . . of SUCH design"

Since flagella and DNA are found in natural things, I don't see how one can one claim they are artificial.

But aren't you begging the question here by asserting that everything in nature was in fact produced by nature? From our experience, machines are artificial (if I understand how you are using the term). If we then find machines in the cell, why can't we say it is artificial as well?

So I'll rephrase the question to ask what empirical test can you perform to show that a particular object comes from a supernatural intelligence? As a follow up question I also ask what predictions does the hypothesis that "a supernatural intelligence was involved in evolution" make that are unique from the purely naturalistic evolution theory?

Just to be clear, ID does not propose a supernatural designer. It could as well be a space alien or whatever, it is not limited to the supernatural. So your question could be interpreted as like "Have you stopped beating your wife". I don't think you can test to distinguish between natural intelligent design and supernatural intelligent design. The design inference only identifies the artifacts of intelligence, not its ultimate nature.

I see the designer as the Christian God, but ID does not require that. ID allows a supernatural designer, and that's where I get into trouble here on CvE, because I'll discuss with you a supernatural designer because that's what I believe, not because ID says so.

As to predictions, if something was designed by an intelligent agent, then you will not be able to explain it as the result of natural processes.

Print the post  


When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and Glassdoor #1 Company to Work For 2015! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.