Year: 2014
Type: dissertation
Abstract: Intelligent Design (ID) is a contemporary attempt to defend the idea that the order of nature bears marks of its Creator. The movement began in the U.S.A. during the 1980´s and 1990´s, and its claims about the relationship of theology and science, and its critique of evolutionary theory have caused much controversy. This study is a theological and philosophical analysis of ID s design argument and its presuppositions. ID is contrasted with naturalistic evolutionism and theistic evolutionism, and related to the broader discussion of natural theology. The study attempts to provide a more balanced and nuanced view of both the strengths and weaknesses of ID s argumentation than much of the previous discussion. The study s main focus is on increasing understanding of the ID movement s argumentation, but some evaluation of the arguments of the discussion is also included and criticisms are developed. ID s design arguments are quite minimalistic, not aspiring to prove the existence of God, but merely of an unidentified intelligent designer of cosmic and biological teleology. It also emphasizes the scientific nature of its design argument. Consequently, much discussion has focused on the question of whether ID is better understood as part of the natural sciences, or as philosophical-theological idea. Though this study also considers this philosophical question, it also emphasis that it is not the central question of the debate, since good arguments are not restricted to science. So, it is more interesting to ask why people believe or do not believe in the designedness of the cosmos and how good the arguments for each view are. The definition of natural science is a side-issue in the discussion of these questions. The study argues that ID s design argument is best understood as an inference to the best explanation that is supported by the analogy between nature s teleological order and the teleological capabilities of minds. The credibility of this design argument depends not only on our philosophical and theological background beliefs, but also on the empirical evidence. Theological and philosophical a priori -considerations arguments are not sufficient to settle the debate on ID apart from empirical study of what the world is like. Nevertheless, the theistic and naturalistic worldviews that have been defended in the discussion are not based merely on scientific data, but also on philosophical, metaphysical and theological considerations. While emphasizing its scientific nature, the ID movement also seeks to build bridges between science and religion. Rather than conflicting with each other, ID argues that science and theology support each other, when they are rightly understood. Though this study supports the basic premise that there can be mutually beneficial dialogue between science and theology, it also warns against emphasizing the importance of scientific arguments to such an extent that the broader metaphysical, philosophical and theological nature of the doctrine of creation and the value of non-scientific arguments is forgotten. The study also argues that contrary to some of ID s argumentation, one can believe both in divine design and Darwinian evolution at the same time. This compatibility thesis can surprisingly be argued not only on the basis of broader theological and philosophical arguments, but also on the basis of the ID movement s own ideas.
Source: Työväentutkimus Vuosikirja
Author: Kojonen, Erkki Vesa Rope
Language: English
Subfield: History and Philosophy of Science
Field: Arts and Humanities
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W1584721122