Replies

Thank you for your reply!

OK, so this would seem to be our working definition of Intelligent Design:

Intelligent Design: A hypothesis wherein speciation is explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.

I have narrowed down our "features of the universe and of living things" to speciation since that's what the theory of evolution explains.
Is that our definition, or do you have something more to add?

The “speciation” substitution does not capture the point of intelligent design. The ID hypothesis concerns “certain features”. IOW, whether those certain features are functional molecular machinery common to all species (such as eyeness) or whether those certain features are points of differentiation between species is not an issue.

I’d rather go back to the official statement narrowing in on “living things” more specifically as follows:

Intelligent Design: An hypothesis wherein certain features of life v non-life/death in nature is best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.

The question here is which "certain features" concern the topic at hand. Obviously some features are the product of intelligent design - this post, by example. Everything is a feature of "life v non-life".....

I don't have a problem agreeing to a more expansive definition so long as it's a valid one. Since we are discussing modifications specific to the modern synthesis theory of genetic evolution, then the definition for our purposes needs to bear some relation to that. We are not talking about whether, say, star formation or the value of 2+2 can be attributed to intelligent design..

So, will the following work:

Intelligent Design: A hypothesis wherein any biological process is explained by an intelligent cause, rather than an undirected process such as natural selection.

Is that our definition? That covers both "functional molecular machinery" and "points of differentiation" (and a number of other things beside).

Actually, lemme backtrack. For our purposes I think your definition as modified below is adequate:

Intelligent Design: A hypothesis wherein given features of life v non-life are explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.

Is that now our definition moving forward?