Intelligent Design

Any assistance is requested. It's a little on the short side, but it'll do.

Intelligent Design

It is important that science be considered a process of understanding through experimentation; scientific theories focusing on assumptions which are impossible to prove or support through the scientific method are false in name. Intelligent design is the most powerful and popular pseudo-science to ever be called a theory – a designation which misleadingly describes an idea with a rightful place in a social studies classroom and nowhere else.
Intelligent design is a faith-based argument that the complexity of biology’s devices could not have developed through random mutations and unintentional improvement. It holds that the irreducible complexity of biology at the cellular level can only be the result of intelligent production through deliberate design by a higher being. The theory also promotes the idea of specified complexity, a principle developed by William Dembski. Specified complexity claims that the complexity exhibited by any number of things must be the result of intelligent design, as physical laws and random chance could not have produced the elaborateness of the universe. While these beliefs are philosophically appealing, they do not stand the tests and burdens the scientific method places on them.
Additionally, supporters of Intelligent design focus on an the “Teach the Controversy” campaign, created by the conservative theological Discovery Institute. The campaign teaches that evolution is a wildly debated and dynamically accepted scientific theory. Implying that evolution is a scientifically immature theory or “a theory in crisis,” it argues that students are mislead into believing that evolution is water-tight. It pushes for the acceptance of supernatural evidence as scientific evidence, in an attempt to push Intelligent design into the science classroom.
Intelligent design’s opposition argues against the “Teach the Controversy” campaign by showing that debate in the scientific community pertaining to the theory of evolution focuses on specific aspects of the theory such as the individual mechanisms through which evolution operates. The scientific community contends that the controversy which the “Teach the Controversy” campaign describes is created by The Discovery Institute. It is alleged that the Institute intentionally misunderstands scientific works in an effort to create an artificial debate it can use as an example for the “Teach the Controversy” campaign.
The Discovery Institute’s mission is hardly scientific: "The objective (of the wedge strategy) is to convince people that Darwinism is inherently atheistic, thus shifting the debate from creationism vs. evolution to the existence of God vs. the nonexistence of God. From there people are introduced to 'the truth' of the Bible and then 'the question of sin' and finally 'introduced to Jesus.'"
The Discovery Institute’s publicized Wedge strategy has openly admitted and outlined the Institute’s goals as the defeat of Darwinism, and the promotion of Christian ideals. Opponents of Intelligent design believe that this clearly shows the political and ideological nature of the debate, underlining its need to create political evidence through underhanded means, as scientific evidence cannot be found.
The discussion of whether or not Intelligent design should be taught at all in school, however, goes beyond its inability to withstand scientific scrutiny. An argument of the constitutionality of the inclusion of the theory in a scientific curriculum is common and contentious. Proponents of Intelligent design believe that a science classroom’s strong focus on evolution implies that there are no alternatives to evolution, which then forces the replacement of religion with the theory of evolution. However, evolution does not argue against God; it simply does not mention a higher power, only because there is a lack of scientific evidence which would support that assertion.
Intelligent design could reasonably be considered the further evolution of religion, combining theology and science in a more acceptable and socially comforting philosophy. As religion is cultural, so is Intelligent design. So, Intelligent design’s place in the classroom is as an addition to a social studies course, being taught alongside other religious philosophies from around the world.
Evolution does not claim that God is false. Rather, it theorizes on what it can defend through fossil evidence, modern observation, genetics, and basic experimentation. Religious beliefs in the existence of God are not included in evolutionary theory because they cannot be shown to be true through observation of experimentation; any observations that are considered by some to affirm God are simply interpreted with an extra theological and philosophical dimension. This is not science. Intelligent design is religion, and religion relies on faith. Its place is in an anthropology classroom.