A Definitive Assessment of Intelligent Design vs. Evolution: Part 2

This is the second in a five-part series comparing the theory of evolution with the theory of intelligent design. In honor of Charles Darwin’s 200th birthday, EverythingIsHistory.com has invited writer Tomo Albanese to share his experience of discussing the origins of man with a lawyer from the Discovery Institute, a proponent of the theory of intelligent design. If you haven’t read the first article, start here: Part 1.

UPDATE: Renamed the title of this post from “Specifically Complex: What You Need To Know to Understand Intelligent Design (Part II)” to “A Definitive Assessment of Intelligent Design vs. Evolution: Part 2″

Photo courtesy of michael.heiss on Flickr

From Expelled to The Selfish Gene, there has been a battle of wits being fought over which theory holds sway – Intelligent Design or Evolution? To make things clear, this battle is more akin to a schoolyard thrashing then it is to an all out war, but surprisingly (or rather disturbingly) ID is holding its own. In part it has to do with the credibility it gets from its scientific approach and the general lack of understanding about science that many folks have.

Yesterday I went over what Intelligent Design (ID) is, and what exactly is meant when we talk about evolution in the context of ID. One of the key features that was mentioned was the focus on Irreducible Complexity.

Michael Behe was the originator of this argument/concept of irreducible complexity, so let’s take a look at what he has to say.

“By irreducibly complex I mean a single system composed of several well-matched, interacting parts that contribute to the basic function, wherein the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease functioning. An irreducibly complex system cannot be produced directly (that is, by continuously improving the initial function, which continues to work by the same mechanism) by slight, successive modifications of a precursor system, because any precursor to an irreducibly complex system that is missing a part is by definition nonfunctional. An irreducibly complex biological system, if there is such a thing, would be a powerful challenge to Darwinian evolution.” (Darwin’s Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution p. 39)

According to this argument, there are biological functions such as the eye, bacterial flagellum, and the immune system that could not have arisen by evolution, because without these components there would have been no way that the organism would be able to live, and if you were to remove just one component from an eye or the immune system then it would have had no reason to evolve in the first place.

This is testable as well; the basic process is as follows as was told to me by Casey Luskin of the Discovery Institute:

1. Observe intelligent agents for the types of “complexity” they produce.
2. Study/test natural objects for these “complexities”.
   
3. If such complexities are present then design is inferred.

Ok, so I know you’re wondering it (or you are already completely lost); what is meant by “complexity”? Well, if you were to follow William Dembski, complexity which is specific and irreducible is any set of characteristics which would be unlikely to arise out of chance (chance is anything which exceeds 1 in 10¹⁵⁰). Essentially, Dembski has provided rules for what qualifies as a random occurrence and what qualifies as “designed”.

Photo: "see what you want to see" on Flickr

So there is Specified Complexity and Irreducible complexity in a nutshell. Now I’m sure with this being Darwin week you are wondering when I’m going to tear it all apart, right? Well, there’s always tomorrow, where I am going to cover the problems with Specified and Irreducible complexity in terms of Intelligent Design.

You may also like:

1. A Definitive Assessment of Intelligent Design vs. Evolution: Part 3 What You Need to Know about the Foundational Flaw in...
2. A Definitive Assessment of Intelligent Design vs. Evolution: Part 4 Intelligent Design Apologetics: 3 Gaping Holes in the foundation of...
3. A Definitive Assessment of Intelligent Design vs. Evolution: Part 1 Evolution versus Intelligent Design: Understanding the Science Controversy. In honor...
4. A Definitive Assessment of Intelligent Design vs. Evolution: Part 5 In honor of Charles Darwin’s 200th birthday, EverythingIsHistory.com has invited...