Intelligent design research

From ResearchID.org

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

[edit]

ID research

The scientific paradigm of intelligent design in action

In order to draw out more of the implicit utility of intelligent design, and to aid in deriving new uses, it is necessary to explicitly note some of the different ways of conceptualizing the applications that have been presented. There is a range of possible applications of intelligent design. The continuum of applications presented in this paper shows employing ID in theoretical, empirical, and technological settings. As with other paradigms in science, the design paradigm will mature (and discover its proper frameworks), and the applications will mingle these three domains of practice. The following are some of these applications:

[edit]

Reinterpretation research

Reinterpretation research focuses on how to interpret current scientific data based on the design paradigm. This is a crucial first step to becoming a productive design theorist or researcher. It is likely that much of the work of current design researchers will be focused in this area. Behe’s foundational 1996 ID book, Darwin’s Black Box, critically reinterpreted empirical data on biotic systems. Another fundamental rethinking of current abiotic scientific knowledge is The Privileged Planet by Guillermo Gonzalez and Jay W. Richards (2004).[1] John Barrow and Frank Tipler explored anthropic cosmological principles , which are broad areas of cosmological research that can be approached with a very robust design perspective.[2]

[edit]

Teleology

Teleological research is the study of purposes, goals, and ends as related to the universe and phenomena within it. This research explores the use of formal and final causes, including how design constraints and boundary conditions may shed light on origins research, as well as deriving descriptive, explanatory, and predictive capacities. Teleological research is scientific investigation concerning signs of intelligence, and the telic properties of what results from intelligent agency. Teleological research can focus on what is often referred to as “top-down” organization of certain phenomena. It seeks to understand the goals, objectives, design principles, and methods used by intelligent agents. Teleological views allow a researcher to study specific phenomena that show characteristics of hierarchical or non-reducible nature without the constraints of extreme reductionism and "bottom-up" modeling. A few examples of this research include Irreducible Complexity, reverse engineering, and detecting design.

[edit]

Causality

[edit]
Causal specificity

Causal specificity research investigates how the full adequacy of intelligence as a cause of biological and cosmological phenomena could be demonstrated. On the theoretical side, philosophy of science considers the epistemic razors (e.g., Ockham's razor and Einstein's razor), and how they influence scientific research.[3] Technologically, this research includes biomemetics, biotechnology, and nanotechnology. Crucial to this research are scientific undertakings involving artificial life, artificial intelligence, artificial genes, artificial cells, and artificial biomolecular machines. e.g., Couvreur & Vauthier (2006),[4] and Koder and Dutton (2006)[5]

[edit]
Causal derivation

Causal derivation is theoretical research that explores whether intelligence is a non-derivative, irreducible phenomenon of nature. Colloquially; whether “mind is over matter,” or visa versa. Currently, most philosophers of science hold to what is called the “causal closure thesis,” which says that only chance and necessity are the fundamental causes to be invoked in scientific explanation. Much of this research is investigating whether or not intelligence is the sole causal explanation for complex functional information and functional energy-transfer mechanisms. One position that holds to the idea of that mind is a basic cause in nature is called “mental realism.”[6] If mind is a non-derivative cause in nature, modern science would regard the universe as fundamentally triadic, having chance, necessity, and design as basic causes. This schema would make information, matter, and energy the fundamental aspects under investigation by modern science. Information theory is at the heart of this research, since the origin and nature of information is a key question in the subject of derivation. Some of the applications of the design paradigm involving information were covered under the sections titled “ID-informatics” and “ID-detection.” Additionally, the hierarchical structure of nature is becoming clearer as science continues its trek into knowledge of cosmological and biological ontology; so what does this mean in terms of reductionism?[7]

[edit]

Testability

Testability research is currently at the crux of the debate over intelligent design. This area is concerned with whether observable evidence can support the idea that the universe and biological organisms indicate design or non-design. Historically, design was discarded from areas of research as necessity (e.g. laws, forces, constants) and chance began to explain more and more phenomena. This was the case when Darwin used the mechanism of variation (seen as chance) and natural selection (seen as a force) to provide a non-intelligent explanation of biological complexity. This schema, which has eliminated intelligent causes in the past, must also allow for the possibility of affirming design. If observable evidence can be used against a proposition, that proposition is scientifically testable. If scientific evidence can indicate to us that some phenomena result from non-intelligent causes, such as biological complexity, then there is the real possibility that scientific evidence can infer intelligent causes. This is determined by contrasting observations of what we know about design and non-design. So, in principle, if chance and necessity cannot explain a phenomenon, then if other criteria are met, that phenomenon could be considered designed. If this is not the case, then an illogical double standard has been established in science wherein design can never be affirmed, only denied. The section of this paper on design detection covered how one might propose that design is a warranted inference. There are testability experiments, often related to mutagenesis or morphogenesis, being proposed by Wolf-Ekkehard Lönnig, Scott Minnich, Michael Denton, David Snoke, Michael Behe, Ralph Seelke, John Sanford, and Douglas Axe. If results are favorable, these experiments could again lend validity to ID premises without providing an exact description of how an existing system was designed.

[edit]
Falsification

Falsification research, which aims at bringing evidence against intelligent design, is well underway. Intelligent design is easily falsified: simply show how other unintelligent causes suffice.[8] The inherent conflict within testability mentioned has inspired research for and against atelic premises and intelligent design. This falsifiability logically follows if intelligent design is testable by means of scientific evidence. This again demonstrates that intelligent design is in fact a scientific idea, since observable evidence can be brought against it. Some attempts to bring evidence against intelligent design have resulted from the publication of peer-reviewed research, or were possibly motivated by a desire to falsify ID. Like typical scientific disputes over evidence, claims of evidence for and against ID are well underway.[9]

[edit]

Heuristics

Heuristic research is the use of intelligent design as a scientific instrumental. This paper has reviewed some of these uses. If the design inference shows itself to be useful in generating applications, novel data and explanations for nature, the design paradigm would tend to be looked upon as validated, even though no direct experimentation be done on the paradigm directly. Steve Fuller, Del Ratzsch, and Robin Collins touch on these points in their writings.

In addition to those listed above, design theorists and researchers have also proposed many other potential research areas.[10]

[edit]

Symmetrical

Symmetrical research covers applications that may be considered related to the ID-paradigmatic. Because of the modesty of intelligent design, fewer restrictions are placed on what might be considered related research. For example:

[edit]

Researchers and theorists relevant to ID

Following are selected researchers whose work is relevant to ID. Some researchers may identify themselves as Evolutionists and NOT as members of the ID community, but their research still has direct implications for ID research.

[edit]
ID Researchers and theorists

Researchers and theorists who have publicly stated they are open to teleology and other concepts of the design paradigm.

Molecular machines
Irreducible Complexity
Protein evolution
Design detection
Explanatory Filter (EF)
Specified Complexity (SC)
Biosteganography
Complex specified information (CSI)
Design receptivity, a.k.a. design input, information receptivity
No free lunch theorems
Law of Conservation of Information
Cambrian explosion
Irreducible Complexity (IC)
Origins research as explored by historical sciences
Reinterpretation research
Ontogenetic depth and the ontogenetic network (with Marcus Ross)
Origin of life
Cosmological information
Cosmological fine-tuning
Mutagenesis - sensitivity of molecular exteriors
Applications of irreducible complexity
Reverse engineering
Mutagenesis and morphogenesis
Evolvability and the limits of mutation and selection
Mutagenesis and morphogenesis
Evolvability and the limits of mutation and selection
Mutagenesis and morphogenesis
Reinterpretation research
Cancer and centrioles
ID as a heuristic
Systematics
Realism
Genetics applications, including behavior of transposons
Reinterpretation research
Common design
Systematics
Front-loaded evolution
ID as a heuristic
Systematics
Privileged Planet hypothesis
Constrained optimization
Privileged Planet hypothesis
Constrained optimization
Photosynthesis and microbiology
Origin of life
Volition in human neurobiology
Mind-body problem
Reinterpretation research
Genetics, evolutionary algorithms, and the algorithmic “cost” of natural selection
Haldane’s Dilemma
Reinterpretation research
Reinterpretation research
Reinterpretation research
Origin of life
Junk DNA
[edit]
Symmetrical researchers

Researchers below probably would not identify themselves as members of the ID community, but their work has direct implications for ID research.

Mind correlativity, counterflow, artifactuality, artificiality
Reinterpretation research
Origin of life
Systematics
Taxonomic and cladistic applications
Junk DNA
Reinterpretation research
Reinterpretation research
Reinterpretation research
Thermodynamics
  • Steve Fuller (history/philosophy of science and social epistemology)
Fuller’s hypothetical
Mathematical dimensions of evolutionary biology and Genetics
Cosmological fine-tuning
  • David Snoke (condensed matter and solid state physics)
Protein evolution
Origin of life
Design by contract
Plant transposons
Altruistic genetic elements (AGE’s)
Polyphyletic taxonomy
Protein folds
Platonic biology
Biocentrism
Anthropic principles and anthropocentrism
Reinterpretation research
Prescribed evolutionary hypothesis
Origin of life
Self-order vs. Self-organization
Biosteganography
Complex specified information
  • Werner Gitt (physics, engineering, information technology)
Information theory
Cosmological fine-tuning
Reinterpretation research
Cosmological fine-tuning
Reinterpretation research
Antropic cosmological principle
Antropic cosmological principle
  • Paul Davies (theoretical physics, cosmology, astrobiology)
Computational universe
Origin of life
Natural genetic engineering
Molecular strategies of biological evolution
[edit]

ID Relevant Research Themes

Below are some principle research themes that appear relevant to the design paradigm. Research themes listed here may or may not be ongoing.

[edit]

ID Relevant Empirical Research

Following are some areas of empirical research directly relevant to Intelligent Design:

  • Irreducible core universality, essential components of systems, whose lack causes disease or functional loss.
  • IC malleability - how far, genotypically and phenotypically, can we push an IC core before it loses function? How far can we push the contextual concerns of IC, including formative dynamics, before function is lost? Are there gradations of functionality within it's genotypic or phenotypic context?
  • IC assembly-dependence
  • Structuralism
  • Holism
  • Systems Biology
  • Abiogenesis and minimal self reproducing genomes.
  • Mutations, obtaining & fixing multiple mutations for new functions.
  • Genetic entropy, the frequency & impact of near neutral mutations.
  • Biotic energy flows, their essentiality, and selectivity, including ATP synthase, ATP, and photosynthesis.
  • Biotic material flows, their essentiality, and processes.
  • Biotic transport, their functions, selectivity, efficiency, and essentiality.
  • Biotic regulation, and its essentiality in micro a macro biotic systems.
  • Robust systems identification, and preservation in oscillating environments.
  • Social selection in mating, (including song, dance & skill), and its importance relative to phenotypical selection.
[edit]

ID Relevant Theoretical Research

[edit]

Historical ID research

Researching and reinterpreting works of authors from the past that directly impact the current scientific issues addressed by intelligent design.

[edit]

See also

[edit]

References and notes

  1. ↑ {{cite book|title=The Privileged Planet: How Our Place in the Cosmos is Designed for Discovery|authors=Gonzalez, Guillermo & Richards, Jay W.|year=2004|publisher=Regnery Publishing, Inc.|id=ISBN 0895260654
  2. ↑ Barrow, John D., Tipler, Frank J., Wheeler, John A. (1986), The Anthropic Cosmological Principle, Oxford University Press, USA: March 1, 1986, ISBN 0192821474.
  3. ↑ Quinn T. Jackson (2005) “On Einstein’s Razor,” Progress in Complexity, Information, and Design, vol. 4.2 November 2005.
  4. ↑ * Couvreur P and Vauthier C (2006) “Nanotechnology: Intelligent Design to Treat Complex Disease,” Pharmaceutical Research, Volume 23, Number 7, 1417-1450, 2006 July.
  5. ↑ * Koder RL and Dutton PL (2006) “Intelligent design: the de novo engineering of proteins with specified functions,” Dalton Trans., 2006, 3045 2006 Jul 7;(25):3045-51.
  6. ↑ Micah Sporacio (2003) “Mental Realism,” Progress in Complexity, Information, and Design, vol. 2.3, Oct. 2003.
  7. ↑ Are there implications here for the genetic code or cosmological fine-tuning? Michael Polanyi states that: “The operations of a higher level cannot be accounted for by the laws governing its particulars forming the lower level. You cannot derive a vocabulary from phonetics; you cannot derive the grammar of a language from its vocabulary; a correct use of grammar does not account for good style; and a good style does not provide the content of a piece of prose. . . . it is impossible to represent the organizing principles of a higher level by the laws governing its isolated particulars.” From the The Tacit Dimension, 1967.
  8. ↑ For more on this, see: structure of a scientific concept
  9. ↑ Scholarly works have been invoked by scientists as reporting evidence against intelligent design. Kennneth R. Miller, Russell F. Doolittle, Jerry A. Coyne, Nick Matzke, and others have claimed that there is scientific evidence that rebuts ID. This means that intelligent design is scientific and that it is testable. Some articles are claimed by the authors themselves as showing that intelligent design is false on scientific grounds. The following are some articles cited as rebutting intelligent design:
    • Adami C (2006) “Evolution: Reducible Complexity,” Science, 312 (5770): 61-63, 7 April 2006.
    • Aharoni A, et al. (2004), “The ‘evolvability’ of promiscuous protein functions,” Nature Genetics 37, 1, January 2005, available online 28 November 2004.
    • Bridgham JT, et al. (2006) “Evolution of Hormone-Receptor Complexity by Molecular Exploitation,” Science 312, 97, 7 April 2006.
    • Dean AM and Golding GB (1997) “Protein engineering reveals ancient adaptive replacements in isocitrate dehydrogenase,” Proc.Natl.Acad.Sci. U.S.A 94, 3104-3109.
    • Lenski RE, et al. (2003) “The evolutionary origin of complex features,” Nature 423, 139, 8 May 2003.
    • O'Neill B (2003) “Digital Evolution,” PLoS Biology 2003 October; 1(1): e18.
    • Pallen MJ and Matzke NJ (2006) "From The Origin of Species to the origin of bacterial flagella,” Nature Reviews Microbiology, September 5, 2006.
    • Zuckerkandl E (2006) “Intelligent design and biological complexity,” Gene. 5 Aug 2006.

  10. ↑ For more research suggestions, refer to ID research questions.
  11. ↑ Davison, JA (2005) "A Prescribed Evolutionary Hypothesis," Rivista di Biologia 98, pp.155-166.
  12. ↑ Denton, MJ; Marshall JC; Legge M (2002) "The Protein Folds as Platonic Forms: New Support for the pre-Darwinian Conception of Evolution by Natural Law," Journal of Theoretical Biology 219 (2002): 325-342.
[edit]

External links

[edit]

Searches

[edit]
Centriole
[edit]
Empirical ID Research
Retrieved from "http://www.researchintelligentdesign.org/wiki/Intelligent_design_research"
Personal tools

Add to Google

Add to My Yahoo!