Intelligent Design – Faith is Not Science

Four hundred years ago, a scientist of worldwide renown proposed a controversial hypothesis. It contradicted established scientific theory and the common beliefs of the people. It was contrary to what was being taught to the nation’s youth and brought outrage and righteous anger to most who heard its tenets. No, the theory was not intelligent design or creation science. The scientist was Galileo Galilee, and his theory was that of heliocentrism, or the theory that earth and other solar system bodies orbit the sun, rather than celestial bodies orbiting the earth. For his hypothesis, which was seen as atrocious blasphemy, Galileo was tried, convicted, and eventually executed. Yet because he had researched, experimented, observed, and documented the natural phenomena related to his hypothesis, his theory lived on. Eventually, the global scientific community could no longer ignore the surplus of empirical evidence in support of heliocentrism. Galileo’s theories eventually became common knowledge and generally accepted by the scientific community as fact, and the man himself internationally recognized as a hero of scientific reform. Galileo’s theory of heliocentrism is an excellent example of a contentious idea that is undeniably science. It falls into the category of science because it was a testable hypothesis that weathered incalculably vast numbers of tests that attempted to prove it otherwise. {A bit abrupt.} The theory that has recently been referred to as intelligent design does not fall into such a category.

Recently, the academic world has been aflutter with dispute over the newest idea that is opposed to evolution to hit the limelight: intelligent design. The basic premise of intelligent design is that evolution as explained by Darwin cannot explain various changes in the fossil record or certain living examples of biological efficiency, and that this lack of support for evolution constitutes verification to of the idea that there is an intelligent force directly responsible for biology’s continuing alterations. A fierce debate has raged over the virtues of instituting the teaching of this theory in America’s public science classrooms. It supporters claim that intelligent design is a valid scientific theory, and therefore deserves coverage in the public academic realm. Intelligent design is a theory that attributes the modification of life to faith, and therefore is not science. Thus, it has no basis to be taught in any public science curriculum.

What is intelligent design? A commonly held belief is that the theory merely states an intelligent creator deity is responsible for starting the process of natural selection, the driving force of evolution. Another popular idea holds that intelligent design glosses over the fundamental aspects of evolution and portrays the Biblical tale of creation under a new guise that is diametrically opposed to evolution. Neither of these is the case. According to the Discovery Institute, an organization that produces the leading intellectuals who are proponents of the theory, “The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.” The “intelligent cause” to which their definition ambiguously refers is unquestionably an omnipotent deity. As such, the theory hypothesizes that because there are gaps in evolutionary theory, intelligent design is a necessary alternative.

Regrettably for the advocates of intelligent design, this argument works against their claim that intelligent design is valid scientific theory. The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) has an extended definition of the scientific method on their website, http://project2061.org. This definition is widely accepted in the academic world, especially the public schools of America. Most important in this definition is the tenet that “science demands evidence.” That is to be a valid scientific theory, a hypothesis’ evidence must be put to the test and pass reproducible experiments time and again. Using this tenet’s logic, the “gaps” in Darwin’s theory of evolution through natural selection do not make intelligent design a valid scientific argument. Yet there are still those who claim that intelligent design is science because it offers answers to questions about nature and life that science, by its very nature, tries to answer. Upon closer analysis of the scientific method, we see that it simply is not so.

Turning once again to AAAS for their excellent definition, we see that “(Scientists) tend to agree about the principles of logical reasoning that connect evidence and assumptions with conclusions.” Although a scientist’s personal preferences do not constitute a valid justification for any theory, the point being made is that a valid scientific theory is based on reason and logic that flow from clearly defined facts extrapolated through tested hypotheses. Thus is found another flaw in the idea that intelligent design is science. Intelligent design theory claims that natural selection is not explanation enough for the universe’s complexity. So what can explain this complexity? Although its supporters are hesitant to admit it, intelligent design offers to fill this vacuum of facts with faith.

Faith is a belief that is held without any empirical evidence, and therefore is diametrically opposed to scientific methodology. Intelligent design theory states that a force with intelligence greater than humanity and far greater power is responsible for the construction of species and the universe as known today. The belief in such a force or entity is only attributable to faith. The existence of God can not be proven or disproved by mortal man, and therefore is not a testable hypothesis.

Intelligent design’s merits are not proof that it is a scientific theory. Intelligent design is a philosophical and religious conviction that is used to supplement the scientific hypotheses of Darwin. Intelligent design devotees are quick to point out the great number of like-minded intellectuals who ascribe to intelligent design theory as though to convince the world of its place at the forefront of scientific entrepreneurialism. Yet this argument offers inadequate justification for the consideration of intelligent design in the scientific arena. As can seen in the tragic account of Galileo, the mutual belief by even a majority of people that faith is grounds for scientific theory simply can not stand against the scientific method of collecting hard evidence.

Galileo died a martyr for reason and empirical evidence, yet his vast and impressive accomplishments live on. His tale is also a cautionary one. The prevalent theories at the time were based in faith, and were also considered scientifically sound. When they were questioned with facts and evidence to the contrary, there was no way for Galileo to make the populace consider his genuinely valid arguments against those theories. This is because a theory based in faith can only be changed by alterations in faith, which can neither be supported nor disproved with evidence. When a theory’s foundations are steeped in faith rather than this reason and evidence, it can not be considered science. Intelligent design is a theory that is steeped in faith. Therefore, intelligent design is not science.

Bibliography: