Theories of Origin: Creationism, Evolution, and Intelligent Design 

By Raymond Fontaine, Ph.D. - January 2005

Part 1: Extracts from a Washington Post Article

    On December 26, 2004, the Washington Post reported that the school board in Dover, Pennsylvania has voted to make the theory of evolution share a seat with another theory: Intelligent Design. If it survives a legal test, this school district of about 2,800 students could become the first in the nation to require that high school science teachers at least mention the "intelligent design" theory. This theory holds that human biology and evolution are so complex as to require the creative hand of an intelligent force.

    Eleven parents have joined the American Civil Liberties Union and filed suit in federal courl in Harrisburg seeking to block mention of intelligent design in high school biology, arguing it is religious belief dressed in the cloth of science.

    In 1987, the U.S. Supreme Court seemed to settle this question, ruling that Louisiana could not make creationism a part of the science curriculum..

    Of late, conservative school boards have launched a counteroffensive, often marching under the banner of intelligent design. This theory has lingered on the margin of mainstream scientific discourse with just enough intellectual heft to force its way into some discussions of evolutionary theory.

    The Washington Post quotes Michael J. Behe, a biology professor at Lehigh University and leading advocate of Intelligent Design. He says, "The human cell is irreducibly complex - what we find in the cell is stuff that looks strongly like it was designed by an intelligence." 

Part 2: Published Definitions of the Theories of Origin

    Creationism is the theory that matter and the various forms of life and the world were
created by God out of nothing as described in the first chapters of the Bible. 

    Charles Darwin's theory of Evolution holds that all species of plants and animals developed from earlier forms by hereditary transmission of slight variations in successive generations and that natural selection determines which forms will survive.

    The theory of Intelligent Design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause. Intelligent design is simply the science of design detection - how to recognize patterns arranged by an intelligent cause for a purpose. Intelligent Design does not identify or describe that intelligent cause.

Part 3: My Observations on This Hot Issue

    In January, when I first read the Washington Post's article about Intelligent Design, I was pleased because I agreed completely with Michael Behe, the leading advocate of intelligent design. The intricate and complex designs in nature required intelligence. Like professor 
Behe, I know that scientists can observe the intelligent design in nature but not its Designer. To go from design to a supernatural Designer is a leap in logic - a mental process outside the domain of science.

    When people portrayed Behe as a creationist, he answered by saying, "my starting point is from science, not from Scripture on which creationists base their faith in God."

    For the moment, until the courts decide that intelligent design in nature may and should be taught in science class, it is wiser not to talk about the Designer. This is a separate issue beyond the scope of scientists and the courts.

    The theory of Intelligent Design, as it now stands, does not mention the cause and designer of the designs in nature. That's why this theory could be accepted by everyone interested in the origin of nature. Since the Intelligent Design theory does not mention God at all, Atheists might not oppose it being taught in science classes. Perhaps the die-hard Creationists would not object seeing there an opportunity to link up with science. Nor should the Evolutionists protest because the theory of Intelligent Design can co-exist side by side with Darwin's theory of Evolution. One theory discusses the design in nature; the other, the evolution process in nature.

    As for myself, I have no problem with teachers of science mentioning the theory of Intelligent Design among the other theories of origin.  

    The designs in nature required intelligence at their origin. Being a philosopher seeking the truth about nature's designs with my reason, I believe in the principle of causation. An effect requires a cause. A painting calls for a painter; a statue presupposes a sculptor. Also the designs in nature were caused by someone or something which I call their Intelligent Designer.

    Cheers to the school board of Dover Pa. that instructed the high school science teachers to mention in class the theory of Intelligent Design in nature. Bravo to professor Michael Behe for advocating that theory. Wishes of wisdom and courage for the judge in the federal court in Harrisburg who must decide whether or not teachers may mention Intelligent Design in their high school science classes. Thanks to all who are playing a role in this momentous break through in public education.   

  
To return to list of my essays, check here.