Intelligent Design: A hypothesis that certain biological features or processes that are otherwise inexplicable are explained by an intelligent cause, rather than by an undirected process such as natural selection.I propose the following additional revisions:
The Intelligent Design Hypothesis:Cleaned up, it looks like this:A hypothesis that cCertain biological features or processes that are otherwise inexplicablearemay be explained by an intelligent cause, rather than by an undirected process such as natural selection.
The Intelligent Design Hypothesis: Certain biological features or processes that are otherwise inexplicable may be explained by an intelligent cause, rather than by an undirected process such as natural selection.The reason for substituting "may be" rather than "are" is that as finally stated, the hypothesis suggests the possibility of testing, rather than just declaring a conclusion. It's much more scientific now.
The original definition from the discover.org website:
HiTechRedNeck, I am assured that the use of the word given as a substitute for certain does not limit the intelligent design hypothesis to current knowledge and conversely would require mention of at least some for any particular assertion of the intelligent design hypothesis.
PatrickHenry and AntiGuv, Im going to fast forward through your discussion to your last suggested rewording:
Considerations such as form, geometry, mathematical structures, semiosis, autonomy, successful communication, complexity and intelligence are within the domain of intelligent design investigation and the reference to biological features or processes might inadvertently limit the debate to bio/chemistry.
The omission of the word best in this discussion in combination with the phrase that are otherwise inexplicable puts the bar above that which is stated by the fellows at discovery.org. IOW, they are not claiming that there are not other explanations, but that the best explanation is by an intelligent cause. I think your last wording was getting much closer, PatrickHenry!
I suggest amending and revising your last definition as follows:
It's also obvious now how little intellectual content there is behind all the ballyhoo for ID.