Why Intelligent Design is not a good idea

By Mogens Michaelsen

If you know just a little about what science is, it is quite easy to see that ID is wrong. So easy that most educated people are probably tired of the discussion by now. From the scientists point of view it has only been relevant to argue against it because there were a risk of ID "polluting" science. But this defense of modern science were clearly necessary - and extremely important for our future as a civilization. Even the Catholic Church recognize this today, I have been told!

This doesn't, however, solve the problem completely. Some religious people will probably just try to invent a new variant of creationism, because they feel somehow suppressed by modern society. Our world is massively dominated by science and technology, in such a way that religion is forced in the background. This is what makes a lot of people frustrated, I think.

It is mainly because of this, people fabricate ideas like ID, and claim that it is a scientific theory. You actually don't get much respect from others, if you cannot label it science. In order to defend this, you have to invent some kind of proof, like "irreducible complexity" or the like.

This way you end up in a situation where you think you have to prove what you believe in. But this situation is hopeless, simply because it is impossible to prove the existence of God, or an "Intelligent Designer", or whatever you call it. Another problem is, that many supporters of ID don't really understand what a scientific proof is. They tend to think, that a proof is absolute and finite, and this misunderstanding is rather important.

In science there is no such thing as absolute proof. At a given time in history you have a set of theories that fit the facts you have from observation. If new observations falsify one of these theories, you have to find another one. This is of course a simplification, but it is enough to make my point here: Scientific truth are changing in time. A correct theory can change into an incorrect theory, or change its limits (like Newton/Einstein). Most scientists have no problem accepting, that a theory has to be dropped in this way! There is not much personal involvement in it.

Now, let us suppose someone was able to prove the existence of God?

Everybody would of course be forced to accept it, but does that make them believers in the religious sense? Some religious people might be tempted to accept this as a good thing. But before you do that, remember that a scientific theory might be falsified later!

Few religious people would want to, or be able to, give up their faith, just because of that. Because your faith concerns your identity as a human being, whereas your believe in, say, Big Bang, is more like the shirt you are wearing: you can always change it.

So you see: it is actually a GOOD thing, that God's existence cannot be proven!


Mogens Michaelsen
http://mogmichs.blogspot.com/