Intelligent design

Intelligent design theorist William Dembski hasproposed an``explanatory filter''fordistinguishing between events due to chance, lawful regularity or design. We show that ifDembski's filter were adopted as a scientificheuristic, some classical developments inscience would not be rational, and thatDembski's assertion that the filter reliablyidentifies rarefied design requires ignoringthe state of background knowledge. Ifbackground information changes even slightly, the filter's conclusion will vary wildly. Dembski fails to ...

Abstract: This article discusses philosophical arguments relevant to the question of teaching creationism, especially with regard to developments in the debate since the early 1990’s. §1 reviews the new factions within the creationist movement, and the overlapping views from “young earth ” to “intelligent design ” creationism, as well as non-Christian varieties. It also considers what are the relevant differences for the policy question for private, public schools, and for home schoolers, as well as possible differences in what it means to “teach ” creationism. §2 & 3 discuss the main legal arguments that have ruled in the public school case, as well as arguments from academic freedom, fairness, censorship, parental rights and majority rule. §4 evaluates the 1 I would like to thank the Association for Philosophy of Education for inviting me to address this question at their meeting in December 1998, at the American Philosophical Association Eastern Division Meeting. This paper is a ...

We argue that the cosmic microwave background (CMB) provides a stupendous opportunity for the Creator of our universe (assuming one exists) to have sent a message to its occupants, using known physics. Our work does not support the Intelligent Design movement in any way whatsoever, but asks, and attempts to answer, the entirely scientific question of what the medium and message might be IF there was actually a message. The medium for the message is unique. We elaborate on this observation, noting that it requires only careful adjustment of the fundamental Lagrangian, but no direct intervention in the subsequent evolution of the universe.

In order to map out the extent to which the interplay between professional creationist and anti-creationist organizations in the United States determines the state of the creation/evolution debates, I shall proceed in three steps. First, I will present an example that characterizes the way in which professional creationism works in the United States. Second, I will review some key aspects of the history of professional creationism and anti-creationism in America. Third, I will present a sociological model that helps explain why creationism in the United States has developed in the way it has. This model is based upon the theory of social fields as developed by Pierre Bourdieu. Its main function is to make visible the way in which professional creationists and anti-creationists are attuned to each other with regard to their arguments, strategies, and the concepts they apply to Interpret their own actions and those of their opponents.

"Although negative reactions accompanied the reception of Darwinism in the Islamic World from the beginning, a full fledged Islamic creationist movement did not appear before the 1970s. Originally it was restricted to Turkey, where Islamic
groups attempted to undermine the materialist foundation of Marxism and Kemalism. From the late 1990s onwards the subject became popular among Muslims in the diaspora. This was due to the efforts of Adnan Oktar alias Harun Yahya, a
hitherto marginal figure in Turkey, to propagate his ideas via the Internet. The Internet allows him to adapt his propaganda constantly to new issues and creationist and anti-creationist publications and to recruit volunteers willing to translate his
books. Thanks to the combination of a neglected subject with the innovative use of new media Oktar gained the opinion leadership in this field. Even movements, the founders of which had attacked Darwinism, now refer to Oktar as main authority on this issue. However, he failed to gain an equal degree of attention for topics like conspiracy theories and eschatology. In these fields he had to compete with a bulk of
existing material in conventional media. The success of his former disciple Mustafa Akyol shows that using the Internet as main means of propaganda may restrict the political impact. He became the chief Muslim ally of Christian creationists in the
USA by managing to get published by respectable “old media”. For him the Internet only fulfils an auxiliary function."

Theistic Evolution is a multi-author work written from the Intelligent Design (ID) perspective, and the contributors are almost a ‘Who’s Who’ of the ID movement. Philosopher of science Stephen Meyer opens with a scientific and philosophical introduction, in which he defines theistic evolution (TE) and argues for its problematic nature. Then, systematic theologian Wayne Grudem gives a biblical and theological introduction, highlighting the incompatibility of TE with the biblical account of creation and with important biblical doctrines. The rest of the book is divided into three sections. Section I (pp.79–543) offers a scientific critique of TE, Section II focuses on philosophy (pp.545–779) and Section III on biblical and theological matters (pp.781–972). The book concludes with a general index and Scripture index. In reviewing a book of this scope and depth it is not possible to comment on every chapter, but I will endeavor to pick out some notable highlights.

This book addresses the relationship between religion and knowledge from a sociological perspective, taking both religion and knowledge as phenomena located within ever changing social contexts. It builds on historical foundations, but offers a distinctive focus on the changing status of religious phenomena at the turn of the twenty-first century. Including critical engagement with live debates about intelligent design and the ‘new atheism’, this collection of essays brings recent research on religious movements into conversation with debates about socialisation, reflexivity and the changing capacity of social institutions to shape human identities. Contributors examine religion as an institutional context for the production of knowledge, as a form of knowledge to be transmitted or conveyed and as a social field in which controversies about knowledge emerge.

Bibliographic references for all works authored by Eugenie C. Scott are provided, including her contributions to the publications of the National Center for Science Education and to other sources. The publication history of the various NCSE publications is explained.

Intelligent design advocate William Dembski has introduced a measure of information called “complex specified information”, or CSI. He claims that CSI is a reliable marker of design by intelligent agents. He puts forth a “Law of Conservation of Information” which states that chance and natural laws are incapable of generating CSI. In particular, CSI cannot be generated by evolutionary computation. Dembski asserts that CSI is present in intelligent causes and in the flagellum of Escherichia coli, and concludes that neither have natural explanations. In this paper we examine Dembski’s claims, point out significant errors in his reasoning, and conclude that there is no reason to accept his assertions.

Few individuals in church history are as popular as Augustine of Hippo. His impressive body of work on diverse subjects, combined with his tremendous influence on Roman Catholics and Protestants, have led believers to imbue Augustine’s writings with great authority. Consequently, he is frequently cited by those seeking support for their particular position on theological matters. This practice is especially observed in the creation versus evolution and age of the earth debates. Young-earth creationists, theistic evolutionists, old-earth creationists, and intelligent design proponents have each claimed Augustine as one of their own and each of these scholars has provided quotations of Augustine which seem to support their view. The famous church father wrote four separate commentaries on the first chapter of Genesis. This paper surveys these works and demonstrates that Augustine was not concerned with the modern controversy. Nevertheless, his purpose for writing each commentary and t...

The first automatic control system was invented for machinery, in 1930. It was used to control the speed of steam engines. By the mid-1930s, the use of automated systems had expanded in the chemical and oil refining industries.

Advances in the construction industry have accelerated the development of automation systems where its use has been expanded to control fire prevention systems. A number of scientific studies to date have been carried out on this automated system until the creation of automated building systems for various purposes such as temperature control, humidity, ventilation, lighting, energy savings, safety systems and more.

In this book, Concise Edition: BUILDING AUTOMATION SYSTEM, everything is simple, short and gets right to the point, where you do not have to read long sentences, ridiculous and verbose.

It is hoped that this book can be fully utilized by you, whether you are a student, a construction worker, an academic or a lecturer.

In this essay, I contend that Plato’s notion of the Divine or God is companionable – in a telling sense of the word, rather than comparable – with a Christian notion of God in three ways. Firstly, Plato provided proofs for the Divine in his first cause (cosmology) position, maintaining all that exists or transpires essentially has, or had a cause; this is also insisted on in the Christian Doctrine of God. Secondly (teleology), Plato’s precept is that humanity is not on its own, amid creation, in its moral involvement – goodness is embodied in creation – therefore, we can discover, and even encounter, order and perfection by examining the universe; this is demonstrated within Christian Theology and Doctrine. Thirdly (ontology), Plato locates supreme importance in the demesne of the unseen; similarly, Christianity locates uppermost value in things not of this world, but on resources from an unseen realm of the heavenlies – a place of origin and ultimate being.

This paper explores Thomas Nagel’s arguments in favor of recognizing intelligent design as a scientific theory that is appropriate for public education. First, the history of ID is discussed beginning with its origins in creationist fundamentalism, showing how it has evolved to seek scientific credibility as a reaction to legal precedent. Next, Nagel’s views on ID are introduced, in light of his past philosophical work and his historical views on science, and then specifically as they have been laid out in his article “Public Education and Intelligent Design.” These views are then critiqued, reaching the ultimate conclusion that Nagel’s support for ID as a scientific theory is flawed, suffering from a problematic conception of science, and ultimately adds nothing new or substantive to the discussion.

From the forthcoming collection: *Revisiting Aristotle's Fragments. New Essays on the Fragments of Aristotle's Lost Works*, ed. A-P. Mesquita, Brill, 2020.
In this paper I argue that several passages containing arguments from design that have been collected as fragments of Aristotle's lost dialogue *De Philosophia* are spurious. In the process, I highlight many of the common features and non-Aristotelian influences present in these passages.

Addressing the controversial question, “Is the universe intelligently designed?” this introductory essay surveys critical problems in Darwinian theory and creationist theology: organic complexity and the origin of life; the relationship of consciousness and matter; who or what is God; design, disparity, and imperfection; and the origin and evolution of man. The discussion reexamines these issues in light of modern scientific research and basic theosophic concepts underlying the world’s religious traditions — suggesting there is a middle ground reconciling spiritual intuition and scientific knowledge.

In December of 2004, the renowned British philosopher Antony Flew made worldwide news when he repudiated a lifelong commitment to atheism, citing, among other factors, evidence of intelligent design in the DNA molecule. In that same month, the American Civil Liberties Union filed suit to prevent a Dover, Pennsylvania school district from informing its students that they could learn about the theory of intelligent design from a supplementary science textbook in their school library. The following February, The Wall Street Journal (Klinghoffer 2005) reported that an evolutionary biologist at the Smithsonian Institution with two doctorates
had been punished for publishing a peer-reviewed scientific article making a case for intelligent design.

https://www.pdfhost.net/index.php?Action=Download&File=70a04f57e572a57339692e18586ff124

It is a widely known objection against the Teleological Argument that creationists commit a category mistake, if they compare technical things to biological organisms. Yet, in his book "The Blind Watchmaker", Richard Dawkins tries to show that evolution is a bottom-up process using a computer program he programmed in a top-down fashion, leading me to the conclusion that one can indeed compare technical things to organisms - with all the resulting implications. This paper is offering a closer look at the computer programs Dawkins used to make his case and why, by using them, he is actually making a point for creation and intelligent design - not for evolution!

This is the partial translation of Edip Yuksel's Turkish book, Ateistlere 19 Soru (19 Questions for Atheists). The complete translation, God willing will be translated later. This book contains 10 philosophical arguments for God's existence and divine message by a rational monotheist. Some of the arguments are original. Classic arguments are also improved, articulated with interesting examples and presented in an easy to understand style. The arguments are proven to be powerful in face-to-face debates held on live TV programs or in conference rooms. Edip Yuksel has debated face-to-face with prominent atheists, scientists and religious scholars. Edip Yüksel has never lost an argument and is committed to never lose in the future, since he is a lover of wisdom, a seeker of truth. Whenever Edip learns his errors he does not hesitate to correct himself and thanks the opponent for helping him to correct his error. In fact, he gave up his carrier as the best-selling-author, his fame as the leader of millions of Islamists, political prospects, and risked everything including his life, after a series of debates with an Egyptian-American scientist, leading Edip correcting the biggest mistake of his life, adhering Sunni religion. Some of the debates end with dramatic intellectual knock-outs, such as escaping from the live TV program watched by millions (Dr Süleyman Ateş), asking the video debate not to be published after signing it to be published for a documentary (Dr Michael Shermer), forcefully grabbing the book from Edip's hand in a live TV program (Selahattin Yazici), escaping from his own mosque while having video-recorded discussion for a documentary (Imam Shamsi Ali), and the philosophy professor in Kazakhstan who escaped to another universe (Prof Beket Nurzhanov), etc. And of course, some debates ended very cordially, like the one through mail correspondence with late Dr Carl Sagan or with Dr David Silverman of American Atheist Organization.Edip challenges Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris, Lawrence Krauss and other prominent atheists. Some of Edip's debates are recorded and available at YouTube. They include Dr Carl Sagan (Late Astronomer at Cornell University), Dr Michael Shermer (Author and President of The Skeptic Society), Dr David Silverman (President of American Atheists Org), Imam Shamsi Ali (Imam of Islamic Cultural Center in NY), Dr Süleyman Ateş (former Head of Turkish Religious Affairs), Dr Haluk Oral (Math Professor at Bosporus University), Selahattin Yazıcı (Pres of Turkish Theology Graduates), Jay Smith (Evangelist), Dr John Conway (Math professor at Princeton)

This essay examines Darwin’s positiva (or positive) use of theology in the first edition of the Origin of Species in three steps. First, the essay analyzes the Origin’s theological language about God’s accessibility, honesty, methods of creating, relationship to natural laws, and lack of responsibility for natural suffering; the essay contends that Darwin utilized positiva theology in order to help justify (and inform) descent with modification and to attack special creation. Second, the essay offers critical analysis of this theology, drawing in part on Darwin’s mature ruminations to suggest that, from an epistemic point of view, the Origin’s positiva theology manifests several internal tensions. Finally, the essay reflects on the relative epistemic importance of positiva theology in the Origin’s overall case for evolution. The essay concludes that this theology served as a handmaiden and accomplice to Darwin’s science.

The “God of the gaps” critique is one of the most common arguments against design arguments in biology, but is also increasingly used as a critique of other natural theological arguments. In this paper, I analyze four different critiques of God of the gaps arguments and explore the relationship between gaps arguments and similar limit arguments. I conclude that the critique of the God of the gaps is substantially weaker than is commonly assumed, and dismissing ID´s biological arguments should rather be based on criticizing the premises of these arguments.
See full paper at : http://journalofanalytictheology.com/jat/index.php/jat/article/view/jat.2016-4.041708101413a