February 54, 2000 - Last year, Kansas approved a set of education standards, which leaves the teaching of evolution up to the local school boards. Shortly after, the Kentucky Education Department deleted the word "evolution" from their educational guidelines. These actions sparked a new wave of debate on the creation/evolution issue across the nation. In the Madison County area, it took the form of a series of articles and some rather lively letters to the editor in the Jackson Sun. This is not a new debate - it has been going on for almost 140 years.
While the creation/evolution debate has had national attention, a group of individuals have been looking at the origin of life in a different way. They belong to the emerging intelligent design movement. The individuals in this movement are not addressing the details of how creation came about per se. Rather, they are trying to establish that the natural world shows evidence of intelligent design. In doing so, they seek to address the claims of scientific naturalists that life arose without the intervention of an intelligent designer or Creator. Among the pioneers of this movement are Michael Behe, author of "Darwin's Black Box," William Dembski, author of "Mere Creation," Jay Budziszewski, an authority on natural law, and Paul Nelson, editor of "Origins & Design."
The idea that the natural world was brought about by an intelligent designer is not new. In fact, prior to the seventeenth century, the study of nature was largely carried out by theologians, such as Aquinas, who felt that by studying nature man could better understand God's creation and even establish the existence of God. They found evidence of God's handiwork everywhere they looked. In the seventeenth century, scientists such as Francis Bacon, began to separate the studies of science and religion. They did this to separate the study of nature from superstition and pseudosciences such as alchemy, but a gap had been created between science and theology.
Somewhat later, due to the success of Newton and other scientists in mathematically describing natural phenomena, many scientists and theologians began to accept the idea that God had set the Universe in motion and from then on it ran according to His natural laws. This is sometimes called the "clockwork universe." Most still felt that God occasionally intervened in the world, as exhibited by miracles. But, for the most part, the workings of the natural world could be explained by natural laws. The gap grew wider.
By the time of Darwin, many scientists began to feel that natural explanations were sufficient to explain their observations, giving rise to scientific naturalism. A supernatural explanation was no longer necessary for them. In the realm of biology, physical mechanisms like natural selection were used to explain the origins of life rather than the hand of a Creator. At this point, mainstream science had completely divorced itself from theology.
The members of the intelligent design movement are attempting to return to the idea that science and religion are compatible. They are taking a number of approaches, including examination of the complexity of biochemical systems, statistical approaches involving diminishing probabilities, engineering and philosophy.
Mainstream scientists, who typically believe that faith has no place in science, are very suspicious of this approach. Proponents of intelligent design are sometimes accused of invoking the "god of the gaps." This criticism is usually phrased something like this: "Whenever you cannot explain a natural phenomenon, you invoke the hand of God." Michael Behe is often accused of this. Behe is a biochemist who has spent a great deal of time examining life at the molecular level. He feels that the complexity of these systems illustrates intelligent design. He states that a system must have been designed if it shows "irreducible complexity."
Simply put, irreducible complexity means that all the parts of a system must be in place at once for the system to work. The different parts could not have arisen separately or at different times by a process of gradual change such as evolution. He uses the mousetrap to illustrate his point. All of the parts of a mousetrap must be present for it to work. If any part is missing, the mousetrap will not work. Thus, the mousetrap could not have arisen gradually, one piece at a time, and therefore, must have been designed by an intelligence. Behe has found many examples of biochemical systems that he feels reflect irreducible complexity.
The response by scientists of the scientific naturalism school is that just because someone like Behe cannot conceive of a mechanism whereby a system, such as the immune system, could have arisen by gradual change does not mean there is no mechanism. We may just be operating out of ignorance and in the future, evidence may be found which provides a natural explanation. For example, prior to the germ theory of disease it was commonly held that epidemics, such as bubonic plague, were the result of the wrath of God for the sins of man.
As opposed to the creation/evolution debate where critics of evolution often have little or no formal training in the field of biology, the advocates of intelligent design are for the most active and well-established professionals in their field. The challenges that they raise are based on careful observation and must be taken seriously by the scientific community. To fail to do so would put scientists in the uncomfortable position of being accused of being closed minded and dogmatic, rather than open to inquiry.
What is the future of the intelligent design movement? This remains to be seen. They are raising their challenges and are waiting for mainstream science to take up these challenges. Currently, they are trying to establish dialogue with the scientific community. This will take time. The average scientist is probably not even aware of their existence. Such is the size of the gap between science and religion. Where they do engage in dialogue, they will meet with a great deal of resistance. Whatever the outcome of this debate, it will be an interesting trip!
Dr. Wayne Wofford is professor of biology at Union University in Jackson, Tenn. You may contact him at 1050 Union University Drive, Jackson, TN, 38305.