Irreducible Incoherence and Intelligent Design: A Look into the Conceptual Toolbox of a Pseudoscience

@article{Boudry2010IrreducibleIA,
  title={Irreducible Incoherence and Intelligent Design: A Look into the Conceptual Toolbox of a Pseudoscience},
  author={Maarten Boudry and Stefaan Blancke and Johan Braeckman},
  journal={The Quarterly Review of Biology},
  year={2010},
  volume={85},
  pages={473 - 482}
}
The concept of Irreducible Complexity (IC) has played a pivotal role in the resurgence of the creationist movement over the past two decades. Evolutionary biologists and philosophers have unambiguously rejected the purported demonstration of “intelligent design” in nature, but there have been several, apparently contradictory, lines of criticism. We argue that this is in fact due to Michael Behe's own incoherent definition and use of IC. This paper offers an analysis of several equivocations… 
THE CHRISTIAN CORE OF INTELLIGENT DESIGN
Intelligent design (ID) theorists assert that ID is a scientific theory that is merely consistent with some religious beliefs. Many critics point to the circumstantial evidence of the apparent
El debate epistemológico en torno a la teoría del diseño inteligente: la intervención de Stephen Meyer
Received: 05/09/2012 ° Accepted: 28/11/2013 The theory of intelligent design had a controversial genesis, which has actively influenced the work of its significant authors. In this debate,
Dawkins in Wisdom's Garden: Scientific Naturalism inThe God Delusion
Abstract Richard Dawkins's portrayal of science in The God Delusion serves protective ends comparable to those often attributed to apologetics. Dawkins construes science as an indefeasible
Loki's wager and Laudan's error: on genuine and territorial demarcation
Is the demarcation problem dead, or are the rumors of its demise greatly exaggerated? ! e answer depends on whom you ask. Some philosophers of science have voiced the opinion that the demarcation
Argumentation and fallacies in creationist writings against evolutionary theory
BackgroundThe creationist–evolutionist conflict is perhaps the most significant example of a debate about a well-supported scientific theory not readily accepted by the public.MethodsWe analyzed
Prove it! The Burden of Proof Game in Science vs. Pseudoscience Disputes
The concept of burden of proof is used in a wide range of discourses, from philosophy to law, science, skepticism, and even in everyday reasoning. This paper provides an analysis of the proper
Proponents of Creationism but not Proponents of Evolution Frame the Origins Debate in Terms of Proof
In Study 1, 72 internet documents containing creationism, ID (intelligent design), or evolution content were selected for analysis. All instances of proof cognates (the word “proof” and related terms
The end of evolution?
A biochemist's crusade to overturn evolution misrepresents theory and ignores evidence In 1996, biochemist Michael Behe introduced the notion of "irreducible complexity," arguing that some
Dynamic Self-Organizing Social and Cultural Processes in Global Development of Humanity in Terms of Synergetic Historicism
The article, Dynamic Self-Organizing Social and Cultural Processes in Global Development of Humanity in Terms of Synergetic Historicism, is focused on discussing a new methodological approach to the
Not by Selection Alone: Evolutionary Explanations and Their Requirements
  • E. Kojonen
  • Sociology
    Palgrave Frontiers in Philosophy of Religion
  • 2021
The alleged opposition between design arguments and evolution goes back to the discussions between Darwin and Asa Gray, and this chapter analyzes both traditional and contemporary ways of formulating
...
1
2
3
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 42 REFERENCES
Tower of Babel: The Evidence against the New Creationism
Creationism is no longer the simple notion it once was taken to be. Its new advocates have become more sophisticated in how they present their views, speaking of "intelligent design" rather than
Why intelligent design fails: A scientific critique of the new creationism
  • A. Menuge
  • Engineering
    Politics and the Life Sciences
  • 2008
The Intelligent Design (ID) movement claims to provide purely scientific reasons for doubting Darwinian evolution. Do these efforts suggest that critical discussion of evolution should be allowed in
How Not to Critique Intelligent Design Theory
Abstract I have been an interested observer of the Intelligent Design (ID) movement for some years, and although I have argued elsewhere that some of the philosophical points made by a number of ID
The edge of evolution: the search for the limits of darwinism
TLDR
Michael J. Behe argues convincingly that most of the mutations that have defined the history of life on earth have been nonrandom, which fits a general pattern discovered by other branches of science in recent decades.
Finding Darwin's God: A Scientist's Search for Common Ground Between God and Evolution
In this lively, engaging book, Brown University professor Kenneth R. Miller offers a thoughtful, cutting-edge analysis of the debate between evolutionism and creationism. After refuting the claims of
The Human Function Compunction: Teleological explanation in adults
TLDR
Two experiments explored whether adults implicitly possess a similar bias in favor of teleological--or purpose-based--explanations of natural phenomena and the relationship between different aspects of adults' "promiscuous teleology" and other variables such as scientific knowledge, religious beliefs, and inhibitory control.
Redundant Complexity: A Critical Analysis of Intelligent Design in Biochemistry
TLDR
Real biochemical systems, it is argued, manifest redundant complexity--a characteristic result of evolutionary processes.
Reply to My Critics: A Response to Reviews of Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution
  • M. Behe
  • Philosophy, Engineering
  • 1996
In Darwin's Black Box: The BiochemicalChallenge to Evolution I argued thatpurposeful intelligent design, rather thanDarwinian natural selection, better explainssome aspects of the complexity that
Simulation of biological evolution under attack, but not really: a response to Meester
The leading Intelligent Design theorist William Dembski (Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham MD, 2002) argued that the first No Free Lunch theorem, first formulated by Wolpert and Macready (IEEE Trans Evol
No Free Lunch: Why Specified Complexity Cannot Be Purchased without Intelligence
TLDR
Intelligent Design is a viewpoint in which natural processes are replaced by some kind of creation or design, in which the entire world is understood in terms of natural processes.
...
1
2
3
4
5
...