GENESIS I

INTELLIGENT DESIGN V CREATIONISM

(A short story)

by Jason M. Kamau

Existentialism?

Agnosticism?

Nope.

Let us talk about the general aspect of origin.

Intelligent design isn't creationism, though you could say one supports the other. The "designer" isn't clear-cut to be a god or something. It's not because something just so happens to be complex that some people claim it was by intelligent design. Intelligent design argues that the features of the universe and living things are more likely to have been shaped by an intelligent cause rather than random chance. It dwells a lot on irreducible complexity, which I can compare to a negative butterfly effect, where the slight change of one of the components of a system- be it part of the universe or even DNA-would make it cease its standard functionality. And now, with the countless systems in the known universe working in such harmony, intelligent design argues that it didn't happen by chance. In human anatomy, the anatomical structures are all so well-connected and are in tune-giving rise to a beautiful systemic being. However, a distortion of one part brings about an imbalance. You can't reach an irreducibly complex system by constantly modifying a precursor system because it would be non-functional (it wouldn't serve the same purpose). An argument may arise that a complex existence may have originated from a more simple intelligent design. This approach says that the more complex a system is, the less likely it is that it came about through an undirected cause—keeping in mind that everything is a system within a system.

The theory of intelligent design has gained a significant following in recent years, with proponents pointing to evidence such as the apparent design of the universe and its laws, the complexity of living things, and the existence of seemingly "irreducible" systems as indications of an intelligent designer. However, intelligent design has also faced significant criticism from scientists and philosophers who argue that it is unscientific and lacks empirical support. In this article, we will explore the arguments for and against intelligent design and consider the implications of the theory for our understanding of the universe and our place in it.

One of the main pieces of evidence cited by proponents of intelligent design is the apparent design of the universe and its laws. They argue that the fact that the universe is fine-tuned to support life, with a delicate balance of physical constants and laws, is best explained by the existence of an intelligent designer. The concept of an intelligent designer who brought everything into being isn't just found in religion or philosophy. Many scientists have proposed that the laws of nature are such that they point to an intelligent designer who created everything we see in the universe. This is known as "the fine-tuning argument."

Why does it need to be tuned? According to astrophysicist Dr. Hugh Ross, if just one of these constants were changed by less than 1 percent, life would not exist. The most famous example is the cosmological constant (or dark energy). This is a number that determines the expansion rate of space. If it were greater than zero, then the universe would expand too fast for stars and planets to form. On the other hand, if it were less than zero, then the universe would collapse on itself before life could evolve. This constant is crucial to life because without it there would be no galaxies or stars -and thus, no life as we know it. Furthermore, if gravity were slightly stronger or weaker, atoms couldn't bond together to make molecules, and thus no molecules of DNA or proteins. This would mean that there would be no life as we know it. Gravity is also essential for other things such as keeping the sun together and holding planets in orbit around their stars. Similarly, if the mass of the Higgs boson were slightly different, the universe would be a very different place. Intelligent design proponents interpret these "coincidences" as evidence that the universe was designed specifically to support life.

However, critics of intelligent design argue that these apparent "coincidences" can be explained through natural processes such as the multiverse hypothesis, which posits that there are many universes with different physical constants and laws and that we happen to be in one that is conducive to life. They also point out that the concept of intelligent design is not testable or falsifiable, and therefore does not meet the criteria for a scientific theory.

Another piece of evidence cited by proponents of intelligent design is the complexity of living things, particularly at the molecular level. They argue that the intricate molecular machinery of cells, such as the molecular motor that powers the flagellum of a bacterium, could not have arisen through natural processes such as evolution. They see these complex systems as evidence of an intelligent designer.

However, critics of intelligent design argue that the complexity of living things can be explained through natural processes such as evolution by natural selection. They point out that evolution can lead to the development of complex systems through a process of gradual modification and improvement. They also argue that the concept of irreducible complexity, which is central to the intelligent design argument, has been debunked by scientific research.

In addition to the arguments for and against intelligent design, the theory has significant implications for our understanding of the universe and our place in it. If intelligent design is actual, it would imply the existence of an intelligent designer, which many proponents interpret as a deity or higher power. This would have significant implications for our understanding of the universe and our place in it, as well as for our values and beliefs. While there are significant problems with the theory itself if it is intended as science, the theory does have important implications which are not only valid but also scientific in nature.

On the other hand, if intelligent design is false and the universe and living things can be explained through natural processes such as evolution, it would suggest that we are a result of chance and natural processes rather than being designed by an intelligent being. This would be very distressing to some people, who find meaning and purpose in life by believing that there is a creator who has given them value above other creatures. The problem with this line of thought is that it is based on an assumption that if intelligent design were false, then natural processes such as evolution would explain everything about the universe and living things. This would have its own set of implications for how we view ourselves and our place in the world.

Ultimately, the question of whether or not intelligent design is true is a complex one, and it is unlikely that it will be resolved definitively in the near future. However, exploring the arguments for and against the theory can help us to better understand the nature of the universe and our place in it, and can provide valuable insight into the broader philosophical and scientific questions that it raises.

Creationism is the belief that a deity or higher power created the universe and living things. This belief has roots in many religious traditions and is often based on the interpretation of sacred texts or other religious sources. Creationism has been a subject of significant philosophical debate for centuries, with philosophers such as Thomas Aquinas and William Paley offering arguments in favor of the theory.

One of the main arguments for creationism is the concept of teleology, which is the idea that the universe exhibits purpose or design. Proponents of creationism argue that the apparent design of the universe and living things is best explained by the existence of an intelligent designer. For example, they might point to the complexity of living things, the apparent fine-tuning of the universe to support life, or the existence of seemingly "irreducible" systems as evidence of an intelligent designer. As philosopher David Hume put it, "when we survey the works of nature, we are led to infer the existence of a designing power from the appearance of design which we observe."

However, critics of creationism argue that these arguments are based on a misunderstanding of the nature of science. They point out that science is concerned with understanding natural phenomena through observation and experimentation, and that it is not equipped to deal with supernatural explanations such as the existence of a deity. As scientist Carl Sagan famously stated, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." They also argue that the concept of an intelligent designer is not testable or falsifiable, and therefore does not meet the criteria for a scientific theory.

Intelligent design is a more recent theory that is related to creationism but differs in that it does not necessarily posit the existence of a deity or higher power as the intelligent cause behind the universe and living things. Instead, intelligent design argues that the features of the universe and living things are more likely to have been shaped by an intelligent cause rather than random chance. This theory has gained a significant following in recent years, with proponents pointing to evidence such as the apparent design of the universe and its laws, the complexity of living things, and the existence of seemingly "irreducible" systems as indications of an intelligent cause.

Like creationism, intelligent design has faced significant criticism from scientists and philosophers who argue that it is unscientific and lacks empirical support. They point out that the concept of intelligent design is not testable or falsifiable, and that it is based on a misunderstanding of the nature of science. They also argue that the complexity of living things can be explained through natural processes such as evolution by natural selection and that the concept of irreducible complexity has been debunked by scientific research. As evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins stated, "the theory of evolution by natural selection is the only theory we know of that is in principle capable of explaining the existence of organized complexity."

Despite these criticisms, intelligent design continues to be a topic of significant interest and debate within both the scientific and philosophical communities. Some proponents of intelligent design argue that it is a scientifically valid alternative to evolutionary theory, while others see it as a way to reconcile science and religion. Critics, on the other hand, argue that intelligent design is a pseudoscience that is incompatible with the principles of scientific inquiry.

Creationism and intelligent design are two theories that seek to explain the origins of the universe and living things. While both of these theories are often associated with religion, they also have significant philosophical and scientific dimensions. In this essay, we will explore the relationship between philosophy and science in the context of creationism and intelligent design, examining the various arguments and evidence that have been put forward by proponents and critics of these theories.

The difference comes in whereby in intelligent design, the creator is not made to be a god but rather a non-interventionist designer who created natural laws that govern the universe and living things. Creationism, on the other hand, tends to be more religious in nature and often rejects scientific theories such as evolution in favor of literal interpretations of ancient texts, most notably the Bible.

Creationists believe that the creator made the earth about 6,000 years ago and there are multiple theories for how this was done. Some creationists believe that God used the process of evolution to create life on earth while others believe that God created all life at once. Intelligent design proponents tend to be more in favor of the second theory, believing that evolution is not random but rather governed by natural laws set forth by an intelligent designer. The reason for this is that intelligent design proponents do not believe that there is any evidence for a god or gods and therefore see no need to make claims about creation or the beginning of time.

Creationists often point to fossils as evidence of evolution and use them as a way to discredit the theory. However, intelligent design proponents believe that fossils are not evidence for evolution but rather an example of how natural law has been at work for millions of years. In fact, many intelligent design proponents believe that there is evidence for evolution and that it can be seen in the fossil record as well as modern-day genetics.

Creationism and intelligent design both hold that life on earth was created by an intelligent designer. This designer did not intervene or interfere with the natural laws that govern the universe and living things but rather set them in place. Intelligent design proponents believe that there are many examples of how natural laws can be seen at work throughout nature. Creationists often use the example of irreducible complexity to show that evolution could not have created life on earth. This refers to a part of an organism or machine that cannot function without other parts and therefore must have been created as such by intelligent design.

Creationism is often associated with biblical literalism and can vary greatly depending on the individual or group holding the beliefs. Intelligent design proponents, however, tend to be much more secular in nature and do not hold any religious beliefs that would prohibit them from accepting scientific theories such as evolution. In fact, many intelligent design proponents are themselves atheists who see no need for a god or gods in their lives.

Creationism is often associated with a belief in a young Earth while intelligent design holds that it is too early to tell exactly how old the Earth is. While intelligent design proponents tend to be more open-minded about scientific theories, creationists are more set in their ways and often believe that any theory that contradicts their religious beliefs is simply wrong. Intelligent design proponents hold that an intelligent designer created natural laws and that these laws can be studied by science. Creationists, on the other hand, often reject scientific findings such as evolution because they contradict ancient texts such as the Bible.

Creationism and intelligent design both have philosophical and scientific aspects to them. Both theories hold that an intelligent designer created the world and living things. Intelligent design proponents believe that there are many examples of how natural laws can be seen at work throughout nature, while creationists tend to focus on a young Earth and literal interpretations of ancient texts such as the Bible. Creationism and intelligent design are both controversial theories that have been widely debated in society. However, they are not one and the same, as many people may think.

Creationism and intelligent design are two theories that seek to explain the origins of the universe and living things. While both of these theories are often associated with religion, they have significant scientific dimensions. Creationism and intelligent design both posit an intelligent designer as the cause behind the universe and living things.

Pennock described creationism as a "worldview" that includes not only the idea of an intelligent designer but also a creator. The creator is said to have set natural laws into place which govern the universe and has the power to intervene in these laws when needed. This view holds that science cannot explain certain phenomena, such as the beginning of the universe or life; therefore, it is best left to the intelligent designer. Creationism, on the other hand, poses that all things were created by God. While many creationists accept evolution as part of their worldview, others believe in strictly guided evolution or even unguided evolution.

Intelligent design is a theory that was developed by Christian fundamentalists Robert H. Wright and Phillip E. Johnson to challenge the Darwinian view of natural selection as the causal agent behind all living things. The intelligent designer is said to be an unnamed force that set natural laws into place and created life. While this theory differs from creationism in its attempt to appear scientific, it remains a religious theory. Intelligent design has been described as an "attempt to re-convert science back to religion" and it fails because it does not explain the origins of the universe or life itself. The intelligent designer is said to be an unnamed force that set natural laws into place and created life.

Creationism believes in a creator God who has intervened in the affairs of men, while intelligent design states that there is an intelligent designer who set natural laws into place. These two views share many similarities; however, they differ greatly in how they explain certain events. Creationists believe that God has created all living things, including humans, and therefore man has dominion over the earth (Genesis 1:28). Intelligent design, on the other hand, states that an intelligent designer created all life and that God had nothing to do with it. Creationists believe that man is at the center of the universe and that evolution does not apply to mankind.

The relationship between science in the context of creationism and intelligent design is a complex and multifaceted one. While both of these theories have been the subject of significant debate and criticism, they also raise important questions about the nature of the universe and our place in it and have the potential to shed light on the fundamental philosophical and scientific issues that they address. Whether or not one believes in creationism or intelligent design, it is clear that these theories have had a significant impact on our understanding of the world around us and our place in it, and that they will continue to be the subject of examination and debate in the future.

REFERENCES

Andrews, E. H., etc., Gitt, W., & Ouweneel, W. J. (1986). Concepts in Creationism. Evangelical Press.

Caudill, E. (2013). Intelligently designed: How creationists built the campaign against evolution. University of Illinois Press.

Pennock, R. T. (Ed.). (2002). Intelligent design creationism and its critics: Philosophical, theological and scientific perspectives. MIT Press.

Sonder, B. (2005). Evolutionism and Creationism. Franklin Watts.

Sandstrom, G. (2014). Human Extension: An Alternative to Evolutionism, Creationism and Intelligent Design (2014th ed.). Palgrave Pivot.

Forrest, B., & Gross, P. R. (2003). Creationism’s Trojan horse: The wedge of intelligent design. Oxford University Press.

Miller, F. P., Vandome, A. F., & McBrewster, J. (2010). Hugh Ross (creationist). Alphascript Publishing.

Intelligent design: Science, religion and intolerance, in the origins debate. (2009). Authorhouse.

Kemper, G., Kemper, H., & Luskin, C. (2013). Discovering intelligent design: A journey into the scientific evidence. Discovery Institute.

Crone, B. (2017). Intelligent design: The witness of creation series volume one. Get a Life Ministries.