The science question in intelligent design

Synthese 178 (2):291 - 305 (2011)
Intelligent Design creationism is often criticized for failing to be science because it falls afoul of some demarcation criterion between science and non-science. This paper argues that this objection to Intelligent Design is misplaced because it assumes that a consistent non-theological characterization of Intelligent Design is possible. In contrast, it argues that, if Intelligent Design is taken to be non-theological doctrine, it is not intelligible. Consequently, a demarcation criterion cannot be used to judge its status. This position has the added advantage of providing reasons to reject Intelligent Design creationism without invoking potentially philosophically controversial demarcation criteria
Keywords Creationism  Demarcation problem  Evolution  Fundamentalism  Intelligent Design
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2011
DOI 10.1007/s11229-009-9540-x
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history
Request removal from index
Download options
Our Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 28,071
Through your library
References found in this work BETA
Theory and Evidence.Clark Glymour - 1980 - Princeton University Press.
Philosophy of Natural Science.Carl G. Hempel - 1966 - Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice-Hall.

View all 15 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Sober on Intelligent Design. [REVIEW]Sahotra Sarkar - 2011 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 83 (3):683-691.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

231 ( #15,970 of 2,171,693 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

5 ( #56,794 of 2,171,693 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.

Other forums