Is ID really an argument for god?

One of the first things our group realised was that the answer to this question depends a lot on the definition of "god". If "god" were to be defined as an intelligent force that created the world, then ID is an obvious argument for this "god". If it were to be defined as an omnipotent and benevolent old man who lives on clouds, then there are far too many missing links between ID and this "god". However, for this question, we decided to define it as a supernatural being who created the world.

The theory of intelligent design may at first glance seem to be pointing directly at god. This may be because ID, unlike other theories such as evolution, cannot be fully explained by science or applied to other cases to test for consistancy (darwinian evolution, apart from explaining the origin of species, can also be used to explain the similiarities between some animals, but ID can only explain its specific arguments, and cannot be extrapolated to other areas). Such a theory, which explains but cannot be extrapolated to any use elsewhere, are easily grouped together with religion (eg. the christian bible explains that earth was created in 6 days, whereas science explains that its formation is due to astronomical factors, and this scientific theory can be used to explain the formation of other planets, and predict the formation of other planets).

As mentioned in the article, there is absolutely no specific link between ID and any supernatural god. It is only due to the common fallacy mentioned above that people tend to think such a theory points to god. However, it must be emphasized that ID, while not an argument for god, does not rule out god either. The theory of evolution only allows the picture of god at time zero (i.e. the point of creation) and only at that point, since natural selection does everything after that. ID, however, gives a larger area for god to come in place (god might have created the world, god might still be monitoring and tweaking the world, god might be constantly tweaking the "impossibly low probability for life to exist" so that we may exist, etc). Religious arguments for god, on the other hand, forces the existance of god (god DID create the world, god IS constantly working to keep the world alive and under control, etc).

In conclusion, ID is somewhat of a compromise between the forceful religious genesis and the flawed scientific genesis. While it allows for the possibility for god to exist, it does not explicitly argue for his existance.

Tu Guang, Wenyu, Jasmine, Amanda
09S06H