1.
Intelligent design
–
Intelligent design is a creationist religious argument for the existence of God, presented by its proponents as an evidence-based scientific theory about lifes origins but found to be pseudoscience. Proponents claim that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, the leading proponents of ID are associated with the Discovery Institute, a politically conservative think tank based in the United States. Although they state that ID is not creationism and deliberately avoid assigning a personality to the designer, both irreducible complexity and specified complexity present detailed negative assertions that certain features are too complex to be the result of natural processes. Proponents then conclude by analogy that these features are evidence of design, from the mid-1990s, the intelligent design movement, supported by the Discovery Institute, advocated inclusion of intelligent design in public school biology curricula. This led to the 2005 Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial in which U. S. District Judge John E. Teaching of evolution was effectively suspended in U. S. Young Earth creationists promoted creation science as a scientific explanation of the world in which we live. This frequently invoked the argument from design to explain complexity in nature as demonstrating the existence of God, the argument from design, the teleological argument or argument from intelligent design, has been advanced in theology for centuries. It can be summarised briefly as Wherever complex design exists, there must have been a designer, nature is complex, Thomas Aquinas presented it in his fifth proof of Gods existence as a syllogism. In 1802, William Paleys Natural Theology presented examples of intricate purpose in organisms, Creation science prefigured the intelligent design arguments of irreducible complexity, even featuring the bacterial flagellum. In the United States, attempts to introduce creation science in schools led to court rulings that it is religious in nature, and thus cannot be taught in public school science classrooms. Barbara Forrest writes that the intelligent design movement began in 1984 with the book The Mystery of Lifes Origin, Reassessing Current Theories, Thaxton, a chemist, with two other authors, and published by Jon A. Buells Foundation for Thought and Ethics. Thaxton held a conference in 1988, Sources of Information Content in DNA, in November of that year, Thaxton described his reasoning as a more sophisticated form of Paleys argument from design. At the Sources of Information Content in DNA conference in 1988, Intelligent design avoids identifying or naming the intelligent designer—it merely states that one must exist—but leaders of the movement have said the designer is the Christian God. The Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District court ruling held the latter to be the case, variations on the phrase appeared in YEC publications, a 1967 book co-written by Percival Davis referred to design according to which basic organisms were created. The first systematic use of the term, defined in a glossary and claimed to be other than creationism, was in Of Pandas and People, co-authored by Davis, a Discovery Institute report says that Charles B. Thaxton, editor of Pandas, had picked the phrase up from a NASA scientist, Stephen C. Meyer was at the conference, and later recalled that The term intelligent design came up. It thus represents the start of the intelligent design movement. Intelligent design was the most prominent of around fifteen new terms it introduced as a new lexicon of creationist terminology to oppose evolution without using religious language, although presented as a scientific textbook, philosopher of science Michael Ruse considers the contents worthless and dishonest
2.
Irreducible complexity
–
Irreducible complexity is the argument that certain biological systems cannot evolve by successive small modifications to pre-existing functional systems through natural selection. Irreducible complexity is central to the creationist concept of intelligent design, but it is rejected by the scientific community, Irreducible complexity is one of two main arguments used by intelligent design proponents, the other being specified complexity. Michael Behe, a professor of biochemistry at Lehigh University, first argued that irreducible complexity makes evolution through natural selection of random mutations impossible, however, evolutionary biologists have demonstrated how such systems can evolve. In the 2005 Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial, the court found that Professor Behes claim for irreducible complexity has been refuted in peer-reviewed research papers and has been rejected by the scientific community at large. A second definition given by Behe is as follows, An irreducibly complex evolutionary pathway is one that one or more unselected steps. The degree of complexity is the number of unselected steps in the pathway. The set of these parts is known as the irreducible core of the system. The argument from irreducible complexity is a descendant of the argument for God. This states that certain things in nature appear very complicated. William Paley famously argued, in his 1802 watchmaker analogy, that complexity in nature implies a God for the reason that the existence of a watch implies the existence of a watchmaker. This argument has a history, and one can trace it back at least as far as Ciceros De Natura Deorum ii.34. Galen wrote about the number of parts of the body and their relationships. In the late 17th-century, Thomas Burnet referred to a multitude of pieces aptly joynd to argue against the eternity of life, chapter XV of Paleys Natural Theology discusses at length what he called relations of parts of living things as an indication of their design. Georges Cuvier applied his principle of the correlation of parts to describe an animal from fragmentary remains, for Cuvier, this related to another principle of his, the conditions of existence, which excluded the possibility of transmutation of species. While he did not originate the term, Charles Darwin identified the argument as a way to falsify a prediction of the theory of evolution at the outset. But I can find out no such case, Darwins theory of evolution challenges the teleological argument by postulating an alternative explanation to that of an intelligent designer—namely, evolution by natural selection. The argument from irreducible complexity attempts to demonstrate that biological features cannot be purely the product of Darwinian evolution. It is thirty years since this was set forth in The Principles of Biology, Darwin responded to Spencers objections in chapter XXV of The Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication
3.
Specified complexity
–
Specified complexity is a concept proposed by William Dembski and used by him and others to promote the pseudoscientific arguments of intelligent design. According to Dembski, the concept can formalize a property that singles out patterns that are specified and complex, in specific senses defined by Dembski. Proponents of intelligent design use specified complexity as one of their two main arguments, alongside irreducible complexity, in Dembskis terminology, a specified pattern is one that admits short descriptions, whereas a complex pattern is one that is unlikely to occur by chance. Dembski argues that it is impossible for specified complexity to exist in patterns displayed by configurations formed by unguided processes. Therefore, Dembski argues, the fact that specified complex patterns can be found in living things indicates some kind of guidance in their formation, which is indicative of intelligence. Dembski further argues that one can rigorously show by applying no-free-lunch theorems the inability of evolutionary algorithms to select or generate configurations of high specified complexity. In intelligent-design literature, an intelligent agent is one that chooses between different possibilities and has, by means and methods, caused life to arise. Specified complexity is what Dembski terms an explanatory filter which can recognize design by detecting complex specified information, the filter relies on the premise that the categories of regularity, chance, and design are, according to Dembski, mutually exclusive and exhaustive. Complex specified information detects design because it detects what characterizes intelligent agency, another objection concerns Dembskis calculation of probabilities. According to Martin Nowak, a Harvard professor of mathematics and evolutionary biology and we dont have the information to make the calculation. Critics also reject applying specified complexity to infer design, characterizing this approach as an argument from ignorance, Orgel used the phrase in discussing the differences between life and non-living structures, In brief, living organisms are distinguished by their specified complexity. Crystals are usually taken as the prototypes of simple well-specified structures, lumps of granite or random mixtures of polymers are examples of structures that are complex but not specified. The crystals fail to qualify as living because they lack complexity, another contribution to the book was written by William A. Dembski, who took this up as the basis of his subsequent work. While Orgel employed the concept in a way, Dembskis use is intended to be quantitative. Dembskis use of the dates to his 1998 monograph The Design Inference. Specified complexity is fundamental to his approach to intelligent design, and he has stated that, in his opinion, if there is a way to detect design, specified complexity is it. He provides the examples to demonstrate the concept, A single letter of the alphabet is specified without being complex. A long sentence of random letters is complex without being specified, a Shakespearean sonnet is both complex and specified
4.
Intelligent designer
–
The term intelligent cause is also used, implying their teleological supposition of direction and purpose in features of the universe and of living things. The popularly termed intelligent design movement is a neo-creationist campaign that arose out of the Christian fundamentalist creation science movement, in December 2007 Dembski told Focus on the Family, I believe God created the world for a purpose. The Designer of intelligent design is, ultimately, the Christian God, some leading intelligent design proponents have stated identifying or characterizing the designer is beyond the scope of intelligent design as a line of inquiry. On December 20,2005 federal district court ruled in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District that intelligent design was not science and was religious in nature. Michael Behe, in his book Darwins Black Box, suggested the designer might be a time traveling cell biologist, one example is William Dembski, who on his blog in response to the question Is the designer responsible for biological complexity God. Said not necessarily and To ask who or what is the designer of an object is to ask for the immediate intelligent agent responsible for its design. The point is that God is able to work through derived or surrogate intelligences and this evidence is available to all apart from the special revelation of God in salvation history as recounted in Scripture. Intelligent design makes it impossible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist, meyer, founder and leader of the intelligent design program of the Discovery Institute admitted on national television he believes that the designer is God. Phillip E. Michael Behes concept of irreducible complexity has natural selection accounting for most of evolution, others in the ID movement however contest concepts such as common descent, particularly of humans and other apes. Though most in the ID movement seem to be Old Earth Creationists, the fine-tuned universe argument is a central premise or presented as a given in many of the published works of prominent intelligent design proponents, such as William A. Dembski and Michael Behe. Intelligent design has been presented by its proponents as a big tent strategy into which several accounts of creation can fit, the vast majority of scientists reject the concept of intelligent design and an intelligent designer. Instead, the most widely accepted explanation is that processes such as natural selection can account for the complexity of life and other phenomena. The concept of the intelligent designer has been criticised as a God-of-the-gaps argument, introducing the hypothesis of an intelligent designer introduces the unsolved problem of accounting for the origin of such a designer. By raising the question of the need for a designer for objects with complexity, intelligent design also raises the question. Richard Dawkins has argued that If complex organisms demand an explanation, and its no solution to raise the theologians plea that God is simply immune to the normal demands of scientific explanation, since such an answer would be unscientific. With religious creationism, the question what created God, as a result, intelligent design does not explain how the complexity happened in the first place, it just moves it. Another possible counter-argument might be a regression of designers. However, admitting infinite numbers of objects also allows any arbitrarily improbable event to occur, again, this contradicts a fundamental assumption of intelligent design that a designer is needed for every specifically complex object, producing a logical contradiction
5.
Theistic science
–
Supporters of this viewpoint include intelligent design creationism proponents J. P. Moreland, Alvin Plantinga, Stephen C. Meyer and Phillip E. Johnson. The viewpoint is shunned by mainstream science and religion and he concluded that creationists must therefore redefine science to restore the supernatural, and developed the wedge strategy. The intelligent design movement began with the publication of Of Pandas and People in 1989 and this means that we affirm that God is objectively real as Creator, and that the reality of God is tangibly recorded in evidence accessible to science, particularly in biology. Johnson presents theistic realism as a justification for intelligent design in his 1998 book. According to Johnson, true knowledge begins with the acknowledgment of God as creator of the universe, theistic realism relies on a concept of God which involves the notions that He is real, personal, and acting in the world through mechanistic creationism. What we need is an account of life that isnt restricted by that methodological naturalism. He suggests that generally God uses secondary causes, but miracles may be needed when theistic scientists are unable to find a materialistic explanation, in 1997 he wrote Why couldnt a scientist think as follows. God has created the world, and of course He created everything in it directly or indirectly, after a great deal of study, we cant see how he created some phenomenon P indirectly, thus probably he has created it directly. Plantinga argues for the acceptance of differing worldview-partisan sciences in place of a common science. Plantinga employs a conflict thesis in assessing the relationship between religion and science and these views have been criticised by Christian physicist Howard J. Van Till, who rejects the conflict thesis, for relying on folk exegesis in his assessment of the bibles teachings on creation. Van Til argues that the problem is not evolution, but its misuse for naturalistic apologetics, similar ideas have been expressed by George M. Marsden and Mehdi Golshani. Forrest, Barbara, Gross, Paul R. Creationisms Trojan Horse, intelligent Design Creationism and Its Critics. How to Relate Science and Religion, grand Rapids, W. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co
6.
Timeline of intelligent design
–
This timeline of intelligent design outlines the major events in the development of intelligent design as presented and promoted by the intelligent design movement. 1961 publication of The Genesis Flood,1965 The term scientific creationism gained currency. 1967 Michael Polanyi article argued that machines are irreducible to physics and chemistry,1968 Epperson v. Arkansas ruled against state laws prohibiting the teaching of evolution, concluding that they violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the U. S. Constitution which prohibits state aid to religion, states may not alter the curriculum to conform to the beliefs of particular religious sects. 1975 Daniel v.1977 Hendren v and we may note that with each new decision of the courts religious proponents have attempted to modify or tailor their approach to active lobbying in state legislatures and agencies. Softening positions and amending language, these groups have, time and again, forced the courts to reassert, despite new and continued attempts by such groups, however, the courts are bound to determine, if possible, the purpose of the approach. 1980 Foundation for Thought and Ethics formed by ordained minister Jon Buell as a Christian think-tank, the clear, specific definition of science used to rule that creation science is religion, not science, had a powerful influence on subsequent rulings. Thus two states had passed these equal time laws,1982 The Mystery of Lifes Origin nears completion, work begins on the book that will become Of Pandas and People. 1983 Percival Davis and Dean H. Kenyon produce Creation Biology Textbook Supplements, charles Thaxton was the project chairman and academic editor. Barbara Forrest describes this as the beginning of the ID movement, statements included The creationist scientific conclusion is that empirical data currently in hand demand the inference that the first living organisms were created. And The origin of printed texts, manufactured devices, and biomolecular systems require intelligent design, in each case the characteristic order of the system must be impressed on matter from the outside. It claims creation and evolution the only scientific explanations of life — what Forrest calls the dual model and this is later described by the DIs Witt as There Kenyon described a science open to intelligent causes but one free of religious presuppositions or assertions about the identity of the designer. He described how he did origins science, how a science open to intelligent causes ought to be done, Witt claims that this is a different creation science from Young Earth Creationism. 1985 District Court Aguillard v. Treen held that there can be no valid reason for prohibiting the teaching of evolution. Thus, it was a set of teachings or doctrines from a religious source that constituted religion. And so didnt apply to Kenyons definition of the creation science. 1985 Michael Dentons book, Evolution, A Theory in Crisis, prominent figures in ID credit his critical examination of Darwinism with their change of view. 1986 FTE copyrighted draft entitled Biology and Creation by Kenyon & Davis,1987 FTE copyrighted draft entitled Biology and Origins by Kenyon & Davis
7.
Wedge strategy
–
The wedge strategy is a political and social action plan authored by the Discovery Institute, the hub of the pseudoscientific intelligent design movement. The strategy also aims to affirm what it calls Gods reality and its goal is to change American culture by shaping public policy to reflect conservative Christian, namely evangelical Protestant, values. Intelligent design is the belief that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause. Implicit in the intelligent design doctrine is a redefining of science, Wedge strategy proponents are opposed to materialism, naturalism, and evolution, and have made the removal of each from how science is conducted and taught an explicit goal. The strategy was originally brought to the attention when the Wedge Document was leaked on the Web. The Wedge strategy forms the basis of a wide range of Discovery Institute intelligent design campaigns. The Wedge Document outlines a public relations campaign meant to sway the opinion of the public, popular media, charitable funding agencies and we will do this primarily through apologetics seminars. We intend these to encourage and equip believers with new scientific evidences that support the faith, the wedge strategy was designed with both five-year and twenty-year goals in mind in order to achieve the conversion of the mainstream. It criticized materialist reformers advocated coercive government programs which it referred to as a virulent strain of utopianism and this in turn would lead the ultimate goal of the wedge strategy, a social and political reformation of American culture. A goal of the strategy is to see intelligent design permeate religious. The preamble of the Wedge Document is mirrored largely word-for-word in the mission statement of the CSC, then called the Center for the Renewal of Science. The theme is picked up in the controversial book From Darwin to Hitler authored by Center for Science and Culture Fellow Richard Weikart. The wedge strategy was largely authored by Phillip E. Johnson, there Duss had been given a document to copy titled The Wedge and marked Top Secret and Not For Distribution. Meyer once claimed that the Wedge Document was stolen from the Discovery Institutes offices, Discovery Institute co-founder and CSC Vice President Stephen C. Meyer eventually acknowledged the Institute as the source of the document. The Institute still seeks to downplay its significance, saying Conspiracy theorists in the continue to recycle the urban legend of the Wedge document. The Institute also portrays the communitys reaction to the Wedge document as driven by Darwinist Paranoia. The conference brought together key wedge and intelligent design figures, particularly Michael Behe, Stephen Meyer, William Dembski, in 1993, a year after the SMU conference, the Johnson-Behe cadre of scholars met at Pajaro Dunes. Here, Behe presented for the first time the seed thoughts that had been brewing in his mind for an idea of irreducibly complex molecular machinery
8.
Intelligent design in politics
–
In underdeveloped countries where rates of religious belief are much higher, support of evolution is consequently lower. In Europe, religion generally has less influence on politics than in the United States or the developing world. Despite this, there are pockets of creationist and intelligent design activity, the Council of Europes Committee on Culture, Science and Education released a report in June 2007 entitled The Dangers of Creationism in Education. One of the members, Anne Brasseur said that the aim of the report was to anchor evolution in school curricula. She provided the following examples in an interview with German newspaper Der Spiegel, unlike in the United States the issue has never been the subject of a major Supreme Court case, nor does it figure prominently in the national media. In Canada, education is the responsibility of the provinces. In most provincial curricula evolutionary theory is required in Grade 11 or 12, however, it can be taught earlier at the discretion of local school boards. Around 63,000 Canadian children attend Christian schools outside of the provincial systems, in 2006, the ministry of education in Quebec ordered unlicensed private evangelical Christian schools to start teaching evolution and sexual education, otherwise the schools would be closed. In Ontario, private schools are not required to teach either evolution or sex education, later amendments to the bill clarified that parents could choose to pull their children from religion classes, but not from science classes. A number of specific strategies and tactics have been employed by intelligent design proponents. These efforts are focused on two efforts, the Teach the Controversy and Critical Analysis of Evolution campaigns, constitution because intelligent design is not legitimate science but essentially religious in nature. According to the Center for Science and Cultures weblog, at least 10 state legislatures are now considering legislation reconsidering how evolution is taught, All have litigated extensively on behalf of the movement. In 1999 the Kansas Board of Education voted to delete references to evolution from Kansas science standards and this had the net effect of removing the teaching of evolution from the states science curriculum. The move angered the mainstream science community which predicted a loss of rigor. Subsequent elections altered the membership of the board and led to renewed backing for evolution instruction in 2001. Elections in 2004 gave religious conservatives a contentious 6-4 majority, the board in 2005 was finalizing new science standards which would have guided teachers about how and what to teach students. On 8 November 2005, the Kansas Board of Education, chaired by veterinarian Steve Abrams, the Discovery Institute was key in the drafting and adoption of the new standards which were approved by 6 to 4, reflecting the makeup of religious conservatives on the board. Critics of the new Kansas standards noted that they promoted the teaching of intelligent design, Kansas standards previously supported evolutionary theory, which held that all life had a common origin
9.
Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District
–
The judges decision sparked considerable response from both supporters and critics. The plaintiffs were represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, the National Center for Science Education acted as consultants for the plaintiffs. The defendants were represented by the Thomas More Law Center, the Foundation for Thought and Ethics, publisher of Of Pandas and People, tried to join the lawsuit late as a defendant but was denied for multiple reasons. The suit was brought in the U. S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania seeking declaratory, since it sought an equitable remedy, by the Seventh Amendment, right to a jury trial did not apply. It was tried in a trial from September 26,2005, to November 4,2005, before Judge John E. Jones III. On December 20,2005, Jones issued his 139-page findings of fact, all eight of the Dover school board members who were up for re-election on November 8,2005, were defeated by a set of challengers who opposed the teaching of intelligent design in a science class. The new school board president subsequently stated that the board did not intend to appeal the ruling, cooper sent the book and DVD of Icons of Evolution to Buckingham, who required the Dover High School science teachers to watch the DVD. They did not take up the opportunity to use it in their classes, note, Origins of life is not taught. Because Darwins Theory is a theory, it is still being tested as new evidence is discovered, the Theory is not a fact. Gaps in the Theory exist for there is no evidence. A theory is defined as an explanation that unifies a broad range of observations. Intelligent design is an explanation of the origin of life that differs from Darwins view. The reference book, Of Pandas and People, is available for students to see if they would like to explore this view in an effort to gain an understanding of what intelligent design actually involves. As is true with any theory, students are encouraged to keep an open mind, the school leaves the discussion of the origins of life to individual students and their families. As a standards-driven district, class instruction focuses upon preparing students to achieve proficiency on standards-based assessments.10, knowingly and intentionally misrepresent subject matter or curriculum. Instead, the statement was read to students by a school administrator, tangipahoa Parish Board of Education case. Its stated purpose is. to be the sword and shield for people of faith. Eric Rothschild, a partner at Pepper Hamilton LLP and a member of the National Center for Science Education legal advisory council, was quick to agree to take the case on such a contingency basis
10.
Discovery Institute intelligent design campaigns
–
Prominent Institute campaigns have been to Teach the Controversy and to allow Critical Analysis of Evolution. These three claims are all publicised in the pro-ID movie Expelled, No Intelligence Allowed, other campaigns have included petitions, most notably A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism. The theory of evolution is accepted by overwhelming scientific consensus, intelligent design has been rejected, both by the vast majority of scientists and by court findings, such as Kitzmiller v. Dover, as being a religious view and not science. The overarching goal of the Institute in conducting the intelligent design campaigns is religious, to science with a science consonant with Christian. To accomplish this the Institute has conducted a number of public relations campaigns, the governing strategy of these various campaigns is called the Wedge strategy and was first made public when the Institutes Wedge Document was leaked on the World Wide Web in 1999. Public high school science curricula has been the most common and visible target of the campaigns, with the Institute publishing its own model lesson plan, in an attempt to avoid repeating this violation, the Institute today avoids directly advocating for intelligent design in high school curricula. These teaching methods were promoted by the Institute at the Kansas evolution hearings in 2005 and this tactic is at best disingenuous, and at worst a canard. The goal of the IDM is not to encourage critical thought, the slogan teach the controversy has been increasingly superseded by the more oblique Critical Analysis of Evolution. Notable among these campaigns is the Sternberg peer review controversy and in the recent case of Guillermo Gonzalezs denial of tenure. Other methods employed by the Institute include what they term Public Education, described as exposing bigotry, other purported instances of discrimination publicised by the Discovery Institute include, philosopher Francis J. After protests, the university decided Bryson could keep the job, marks II, which included Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary research professor in philosophy William Dembski as a postdoctoral researcher. Court cases have upheld school districts and universities right to restrict teaching to a specified curriculum, none of these purported cases of discrimination have been subjected to formal legal or congressional scrutiny. In August 2007, an upcoming movie publicising a number of incidents was announced, entitled Expelled, No Intelligence Allowed. The campaign has found traction with the Discovery Institutes constituency, conservative Christians, critics of the Institute and intelligent design have alleged that the campaign is founded on intellectual dishonesty. PZ Myers describes the free speech on evolution campaign as promoting intolerance, lies and distortions, New Mexicans for Science and Reason cite the Institutes press releases touting Free Speech on Evolution as an example of the Institute promoting what they call The Lie. In 2006, Discovery Institute Fellow John West nominated the book Of Pandas and People, however, the site is still accessible, now being hosted on a third party server. As of May 2008, none of them were passed into law. They purport that teachers, students, and college professors face intimidation and retaliation when discussing scientific criticisms of evolution, critics of the bills point out that there are no credible scientific critiques of evolution
11.
Teach the Controversy
–
The intelligent design movement and the Teach the Controversy campaign are directed and supported largely by the Discovery Institute, a conservative Christian think tank based in Seattle, Washington. The overall goals of the movement were stated as to scientific materialism and to replace with the theistic understanding that nature. The Dover ruling also characterized teaching the controversy as part of a religious ploy, to the chagrin of Graff, who describes himself as a liberal secularist, the idea was later appropriated by Phillip E. Johnson, Discovery Institute program advisor and father of the ID movement. In his book Johnson proposed casting the conflicting points of view, johnsons usage differs somewhat from Graffs original concept. The phrase was picked up by other Discovery Institute affiliates Stephen C, the roots of the intelligent design movements strategy are found in the past attempts of creationists to force religious views into public school science classes. The most recent of these had been creation science, which sought to provide a veneer for the biblical account of Genesis. The characteristics of the intelligent design movement are a response to the tactical and legal failings of earlier creationist movements. Comparisons of the drafts of the intelligent design textbook Of Pandas and People before, the campaign was devised by Stephen C. Meyer and Discovery Institute founder and President Bruce Chapman as a compromise strategy in March 2002. They had come to the realisation that the dispute over intelligent designs scientific standing was complicating their efforts to have evolution challenged in the science classroom. This strategy was designed to move the focus onto an approach that stresses open debate and evolutions purported weakness, another advantage of this strategy was to allay teacher fears of legal action. The Teach the Controversy strategy has benefitted from stacking municipal, county, dIs goal is to move from battles over standards to curriculum writing and textbook adoption while undermining the central positions of evolution in biology and methodological naturalism in science. The American Society for Clinical Investigations Journal of Clinical Investigation describes the Teach the Controversy strategy and campaign as a hoax, Intelligent design proponents argue their concepts and motives should be given independent consideration. The judge in the Kitzmiller v, even if they dont wish to recognize these as evidences and arguments for creationism. Glenn Branch of the National Center for Science Education says this comment shows that the teach the controversy strategy was pioneered in the wake of Edwards v. Aguillard. Prior to the September 2005 start of the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial, thus, the Discovery Institute repositioned itself. It publicly abandoned advocating for any policies or laws that required the teaching of intelligent design in favor of a Teach the Controversy strategy, but the Dover ruling also characterized teaching the controversy as part of a religious ploy. By May 2006 the Discovery Institute sought to replace the failed teach the controversy strategy with a strategy broadened to include examples of other supposedly legitimate scientific controversies, in a subsequent draft, it was changed to Conducting the Critical Analysis Activity. The campaigns of intelligent design proponents seeking curricular challenges have been disruptive, divisive and expensive for the affected communities
12.
Discovery Institute
–
The Discovery Institute is a non-profit public policy think tank based in Seattle, Washington, best known for its advocacy of the pseudoscientific principle of intelligent design. In making this determination, we have addressed the question of whether ID is science. We have concluded that it is not, and moreover that ID cannot uncouple itself from its creationist and it was the courts opinion that intelligent design was merely a redressing of creationism and that, as such, it was not a scientific proposition. The Institute was founded in 1990 as an educational foundation. Following their graduation, Chapman and Gilder advanced their progressive Republican campaign in their 1966 polemic book The Party That Lost Its Head, the Party That Lost Its Head denounced Goldwaters conservative backers for their rampant and paranoid distrust of intellectuals. Chapman moved to the right in the Reagan administration, where he served as director of the United States Census Bureau. Chapman left the Census Bureau to work in the White House under Reagan adviser Edwin Meese III and was appointed United States Ambassador to the United Nations Organizations in Vienna and his next work, Wealth and Poverty, was cited by President Reagan. Gilders later books have dealt more with developments in technology, such as Microcosm, Chapman had built a political platform, but lacked funding and a defining issue. Kenyon had co-authored Of Pandas and People, and in 1993 Meyer had contributed to the notes for the second edition of Pandas. Meyer was an old friend of Gilder, and over dinner about a later they formed the idea of a think tank opposed to materialism. In 2002, the name was changed to the Center for Science, the Center for Science and Culture, formerly known as the Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture, is a subsidiary of the Discovery Institute. It was established in 1996 with the assistance of Phillip E. Johnson to advance the wedge strategy, Bruce Chapman calls the CRSC our No.1 project. Since its founding in 1996, the Institutes CSC has spent 39 percent of its $9, the CSC lobbies aggressively to policymakers for wider acceptance of intelligent design and against the theory of evolution and what it terms scientific materialism. To that end, the CSC works to advance a policy it terms the Wedge strategy, the Teach the Controversy strategy was announced by Meyer in 2002. In 2005, the Discovery Institute provided the funding to set up the Biologic Institute in Redmond, according to Axe, the labs main objective is to show that the design perspective can lead to better science, and will contribute substantially to the scientific case for intelligent design. Previously serving as a director of the Biologic Institute was George Weber, PZ Myers likens the Biologic Institutes design research program to cargo cults, with Intelligent Design creationists pretend that theyre doing science. Its economics and legal programs advocate tort reform, lower taxation, the Discovery Institute also maintains a foreign policy program currently focused on Russia and East Asia. The Institutes primary thrust in terms of funding and resources dedicated are those political and cultural campaigns centering on intelligent design and it has employed a number of specific political strategies and tactics in the furtherance of its goals
13.
Center for Science and Culture
–
The Center for Science and Culture, formerly known as the Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture, is part of the Discovery Institute, a conservative Christian think tank in the United States. The Center for Science and Culture serves as the hub of the intelligent design movement, nearly all of the luminaries of intelligent design are either CSC advisors, officers, or fellows. Meyer, a vice president of the Discovery Institute and founder of the CSC, serves as a Senior Fellow. Johnson is commonly presented as the father and architect of the Centers Wedge strategy and Teach the Controversy campaign. In 1987, the US Supreme Court ruled in Edwards v. Aguillard against creation science being taught in United States public school science classes, the Edwards v. Aguillard ruling also inspired Phillip E. Johnson to begin anti-evolution campaigning. Kenyon had co-authored Of Pandas and People, and in 1993 Meyer had contributed to the notes for the second edition of Pandas. Meyer was an old friend of Discovery Institute co-founder George Gilder and it was founded in 1996 by the Discovery Institute with funding provided by Fieldstead & Company, the Stewardship Foundation, Howard Ahmanson, Jr. and the Maclellan Foundation. The evolution of the Centers name in 2002 reflects its attempt to present itself as less religiously motivated in the publics eye. The renewal in its name referred to its goal of renewing American culture by grounding societys major institutions, especially education. The Center maintains that the exclusion of supernatural explanations introduces a bias that is driven by materialism rather than being scientifically based, Program Director Stephen C. Meyer Associate Director John G. West Program Advisor Phillip E. Johnson Senior Fellows Fellows Former Fellows Casey Luskin, Research Coordinator. Luskin has helped promote the Academic Freedom bills in Florida alongside Ben Stein, Luskin also writes for the Discovery Institutes blog, offering critiques of evolution, which have been met with stiff criticism and rebuttal from the scientific community. Robert L. Crowther, II, Director of Communications An internal CSC report dating from 1998 which outlined a plan for fostering broader acceptance of ID was leaked to the public in 1999. This plan became known as the Wedge strategy, if the CSCs strategy is successful, within twenty years the goals are To see intelligent design theory as the dominant perspective in science. And To see design theory permeate our religious, cultural, moral and political life, the CSC has responded to controversy regarding the Wedge Document, saying Conspiracy theorists in the media continue to recycle the urban legend of the Wedge document. The CSCs Teach the Controversy campaign seeks to promote the teaching of the range of scientific views on evolution on unresolved issues. Critics of the CSCs campaign say that they have manufactured the controversy, the CSC is the primary organizer and promoter of the Teach the Controversy campaign. The CSC believe that the program and curricula they advocate presents evidence both for and against evolution and then encourages students to evaluate the arguments themselves, in its early years, the CSC offered science curriculum that assured teachers that its Web curriculum can be appropriated without textbook adoption wars. This had the net effect of encouraging ID sympathetic teachers to side-step standard textbook adoption procedures, the cultivation of support for ID and its social and political agenda in higher education is a very active part of CSCs strategy
14.
Intelligent Design and Evolution Awareness Center
–
There are about 25 active chapters of this organization in the United States, Kenya, Canada, Ukraine, and The Philippines. There have been a total of 35 active chapters formed and several others are currently pending, six out of the listed 32 chapters in the USA are located at high schools. In December 2008, biologist Allen MacNeill stated, on the basis of analysis of the webpages of the organization and local chapters. IDEA was first formed in May 1999 by Steve Renner, Eddie Colanter and it describes its goal as, The IDEA Center is run by a board of directors and an advisory board. In addition, Ryan Huxley and Stephen Huxley are board members as well, the majority of the advisory board are Fellows of the Discovery Institute, the driving force behind the intelligent design movement, or affiliated with the institute in some way. The Institute has been the source of support to the IDEA Center for its entire history. IDEA Center co-founder Casey Luskin after graduating law school went on to a staff position at the Discovery Institute contributing to its blog. The center through most of its existence maintained a requirement that those founding new IDEA Clubs or running existing clubs, so-called club leaders, be Christian. The reasoning was given as the IDEA Center Leadership believes, for reasons unrelated to intelligent design theory. The mission statement will be re-posted when finalized, the email address denotes assignation to an employee of SDSU, a publicly funded university, which does not have a chapter at its school. IDEA Center site Human Timeline – Smithsonian, National Museum of Natural History
15.
Physicians and Surgeons for Scientific Integrity
–
While in the past the organization sponsored events promoting intelligent design and fundamentalist Christianity, it is currently largely inactive. The PSSI has created and maintains a public list of professionals who Dissent from Darwinism. This list is used by the Discovery Institute in its anti-evolution campaigns, the petition is in support of the Discovery Institute claims that intelligent design is scientifically valid while asserting that evolution lacks broad scientific support. PSSI asserts that academic freedom is being hampered by evolution supporters suppressing views that they disagree with, the PSSI website repeats other standard creationist objections to evolution, including the claim that subscription to Darwinian macroevolution is damaging to the social structures of societies. This is contrary to the data analyzed in a study published by author and illustrator Gregory S. Paul, nevertheless, the methodlogy and conclusions of Pauls study were criticized by more recent articles published in the same journal. PSSI also quotes film maker and Harvard Medical School graduate Michael Crichton, Discovery Institute fellow, is one of the Directors of the PSSI. The PSSI invites any person with an M. D. D. O, D. V. M. or equivalent degree to be a physician/surgeon member of PSSI. The PSSI offers separate memberships for other professionals and the general public. The organization has not held any such rallies or public meetings since that time, while the website is still accepting membership applications and donations, the organization is largely inactive. By May 8,2006, the PSSI Dissent petition had 34 signatories, originally it was free to join the PSSI. This continued to be true at least through April 11,2007 and this rally drew about 3500-4000 people, according to Hank Tippins of the Tampa Bay newspaper, The Observer News. Jacob Tillman of the University of South Florida newspaper, The Oracle estimated that the crowd was larger than 1000, apologetic organizations promoting the event had hoped to fill all 7700 seats in the Sun Dome. This meeting featured the Discovery Institutes Jonathan Wells and fellow Michael Behe, the Sun Dome rally was opposed by the Florida Citizens for Science organization. The PSSI also sponsored a three-hour presentation to 120 people at the Radisson Hotel in St. Petersburg, Florida on the morning of Saturday, September 30,2006 and this discussion featured intelligent design advocates Michael Behe, Ralph Seelke and Jonathan Wells. St. Petersburg Times reporter Melanie Ave reported that the material was met with skepticism in some quarters, a debate was planned as a second part to Darwin or Design. Featuring the Discovery Institutes Stephen C. Meyer
16.
Jewish reactions to intelligent design
–
Proponents claim that their hypothesis is scientific, that it challenges the dominant scientific model of evolution. Scholar Noah J. Efron wrote in 2014, No American Jewish organization advocates teaching intelligent design in public schools, No Jewish religious body endorses it. Almost all American Jews agree that intelligent design has no place in the school science curriculum. And polls consistently show that Jews hold this view far more commonly than members of any religious or ethnic group in America. In 2005, Jeffrey Sinensky, general counsel for the American Jewish Committee, Sinensky stated, Intelligent design is not a scientifically accepted theory, but a religious theory similar to creationism, which has no place in the science classroom of a public school. Any discussion of creationism or intelligent design would be appropriate in a history or comparative religion class. According to the Anti-Defamation League, The U. S, constitution guarantees the rights of Americans to believe the religious theories of creation but it does not permit religious theories to be taught in public school science classes. The premise of intelligent design theory is that it can provide evidence that confirms the existence of a kind of creator. Like poetry and certain kinds of prose, which sometimes speak in metaphors and symbols, rabbis have often expressed this opinion even while distinguishing their own theistic views of life from those of Darwinism. For example, to Rabbi Michael Schwab, a rabbi in the Conservative movement, What Darwin sees as random, we see as the miraculous and natural unfolding of God’s subtle. However, Schwab disagrees with the intelligent design movements claim, that the existence of God can be proven as a scientific theory that has equal evidence in science as evolution. Schwab writes, We cannot prove God’s existence through science any more than we can prove there is an afterlife in that manner. Gods existence is not subject to data, there is no experiment to be done in this matter of which the results can be replicated in the future. The scientific method of discovering truth involves developing an assumption, there is no experiment we can create that will prove or disprove that an Intelligent Designer interfered in the natural progression of life on earth to create different organs or species of animals. Morgan goes on to explain his own beliefs, can I describe how God was involved in this process. Can I prove that God was involved in this process, as I said, our beliefs are not science. I believe that God not only created the Universe in this way, God cares deeply about us and is there for us when we call upon our Creator. Many leaders of Modern Orthodox Judaism expressed similar views about intelligent design, for example, Rabbi Dr. Tzvi Hersh Weinreb, the executive Vice President of the Orthodox Union told the daily Haaretz, Intelligent Design calls to our attention the amazing complexity of the universe
17.
Creationism
–
Creationism is the religious belief that the universe and life originated from specific acts of divine creation, as opposed to the scientific conclusion that they came about through natural processes. Creationists base their beliefs on a fundamentalist reading of texts, including the creation myths found in Genesis. For young Earth creationists, these beliefs are based on a literalist interpretation of the Genesis creation narrative, literalist creationists believe that evolution cannot adequately account for the history, diversity, and complexity of life on Earth. Pseudoscientific branches of creationism include creation science, flood geology, and intelligent design, as well as subsets of pseudoarchaeology, pseudohistory and this story is the basis of Creationist cosmology and biology. The Genesis flood narrative tells how God destroys the world and all life through a great flood and this forms the basis of Creationist geology, better known as flood geology. Several attempts have been made to categorize the different types of creationism, Creationism covers a spectrum of beliefs which have been categorized into the general types listed below. Most young Earth creationists believe that the universe has an age as the Earth. A few assign a much older age to the universe than to Earth, Creationist cosmologies give the universe an age consistent with the Ussher chronology and other young Earth time frames. The Christian organizations Institute for Creation Research and the Creation Research Society both promote young Earth creationism in the US. Another organization with similar views, Answers in Genesis —based in both the US and the United Kingdom—has opened the Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky, to promote young Earth creationism. Creation Ministries International promotes young Earth views in Australia, Canada, South Africa, New Zealand, the US, among Roman Catholics, the Kolbe Center for the Study of Creation promotes similar ideas. Old Earth creationism holds that the universe was created by God. This group generally believes that the age of the universe and the age of the Earth are as described by astronomers and geologists, but that details of modern evolutionary theory are questionable. Old Earth creationism itself comes in at least three types, Gap creationism, also called restoration creationism, holds that life was created on a pre-existing old Earth. This version of creationism relies on an interpretation of Genesis 1. It is considered that the words formless and void in fact denote waste and ruin, taking account the original Hebrew. Genesis 1, 1–2 is consequently translated, In the beginning God created the heaven, and the earth was without form, and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters, thus, the six days of creation start sometime after the Earth was without form and void
18.
Teleological argument
–
It is an argument in natural theology. The earliest recorded versions of this argument are associated with Socrates in ancient Greece, Socratic philosophy influenced the development of the Abrahamic religions in many ways, and the teleological argument has a long association with them. In the Middle Ages, Islamic theologians such as Al-Ghazali used the argument, although it was rejected as unnecessary by Quranic literalists, later, the teleological argument was accepted by Saint Thomas Aquinas and included as the fifth of his Five Ways of proving the existence of God. In early modern England clergymen such as William Turner and John Ray were well-known proponents, in the early 18th century, William Derham published his Physico-Theology, which gave his demonstration of the being and attributes of God from his works of creation. From the beginning, there have been criticisms of the different versions of the teleological argument. Also starting already in classical Greece, two approaches to the argument developed, distinguished by their understanding of whether the natural order was literally created or not. The non-creationist approach starts most clearly with Aristotle, although many thinkers, such as the Neoplatonists, the Neoplatonists did not find the teleological argument convincing, and in this they were followed by medieval philosophers such as Al-Farabi and Avicenna. Later, Averroes and Thomas Aquinas considered the argument acceptable, religious thinkers in Judaism, Hinduism, Confucianism, Islam and Christianity also developed versions of the teleological argument. Later, variants on the argument from design were produced in Western philosophy, Anaxagoras is the first person who is definitely known to have explained such a concept using the word nous. Aristotle reports an earlier philosopher from Clazomenae named Hermotimus who had taken a similar position, amongst Pre-Socratic philosophers before Anaxagoras, other philosophers had proposed a similar intelligent ordering principle causing life and the rotation of the heavens. For example Empedocles, like Hesiod much earlier, described cosmic order and living things as caused by a version of love. In his Philebus 28c Plato has Socrates speak of this as a tradition, saying that all philosophers agree—whereby they really exalt themselves—that mind is king of heaven, and later states that the ensuing discussion confirms the utterances of those who declared of old that mind always rules the universe. Xenophons report in his Memorabilia might be the earliest clear account of an argument that there is evidence in nature of intelligent design. In Platos Phaedo, Socrates is made to say just before dying that his discovery of Anaxagoras concept of a cosmic nous as the cause of the order of things, was an important turning point for him. But he also expressed disagreement with Anaxagoras understanding of the implications of his own doctrine, Socrates complained that Anaxagoras restricted the work of the cosmic nous to the beginning, as if it were uninterested and all events since then just happened because of causes like air and water. Socrates, on the hand, apparently insisted that the demiurge must be loving. Plato has a character explain the concept of a demiurge with supreme wisdom, Platos teleological perspective is also built upon the analysis of a priori order and structure in the world that he had already presented in The Republic. The story does not propose creation ex nihilo, rather, the demiurge made order from the chaos of the cosmos, Platos student and friend Aristotle, continued the Socratic tradition of criticising natural scientists such as Democritus who sought to explain everything in terms of matter and chance motion
19.
Analogy
–
Analogy is a cognitive process of transferring information or meaning from a particular subject to another, or a linguistic expression corresponding to such a process. The word analogy can also refer to the relation between the source and the target themselves, which is often, though not necessarily, a similarity, as in the biological notion of analogy. Analogy plays a significant role in solving, as well as decision making, perception, memory, creativity, emotion, explanation. It lies behind basic tasks such as the identification of places, objects and people, for example, in face perception and it has been argued that analogy is the core of cognition. Specific analogical language comprises exemplification, comparisons, metaphors, similes, allegories, and parables, phrases like and so on, and the like, as if, and the very word like also rely on an analogical understanding by the receiver of a message including them. Analogy is important not only in language and common sense but also in science, philosophy. In cognitive linguistics, the notion of conceptual metaphor may be equivalent to that of analogy, Analogy has been studied and discussed since classical antiquity by philosophers, scientists, and lawyers. The last few decades have shown a renewed interest in analogy, in ancient Greek the word αναλογια originally meant proportionality, in the mathematical sense, and it was indeed sometimes translated to Latin as proportio. From there analogy was understood as identity of relation between any two ordered pairs, whether of mathematical nature or not, kants Critique of Judgment held to this notion. Kant argued that there can be exactly the same relation between two different objects. The same notion of analogy was used in the US-based SAT tests, for example, Hand is to palm as foot is to ____. This relation is not apparent in some definitions of palm and sole, where the former is defined as the inner surface of the hand. Analogy and abstraction are different cognitive processes, and analogy is often an easier one and this analogy is not comparing all the properties between a hand and a foot, but rather comparing the relationship between a hand and its palm to a foot and its sole. While a hand and a foot have many dissimilarities, the focuses on their similarity in having an inner surface. A computer algorithm has achieved human-level performance on multiple-choice analogy questions from the SAT test, the algorithm measures the similarity of relations between pairs of words by statistical analysis of a large collection of text. It answers SAT questions by selecting the choice with the highest relational similarity, Greek philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle actually used a wider notion of analogy. They saw analogy as a shared abstraction, analogous objects did not share necessarily a relation, but also an idea, a pattern, a regularity, an attribute, an effect or a philosophy. These authors also accepted that comparisons, metaphors and images could be used as arguments, analogies should also make those abstractions easier to understand and give confidence to the ones using them
20.
God
–
In monotheism, God is conceived of as the Supreme Being and principal object of faith. The concept of God as described by most theologians includes the attributes of omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, divine simplicity, many theologians also describe God as being omnibenevolent and all loving. Furthermore, some religions attribute only a purely grammatical gender to God, incorporeity and corporeity of God are related to conceptions of transcendence and immanence of God, with positions of synthesis such as the immanent transcendence of Chinese theology. God has been conceived as personal or impersonal. In theism, God is the creator and sustainer of the universe, while in deism, God is the creator, in pantheism, God is the universe itself. In atheism, God is not believed to exist, while God is deemed unknown or unknowable within the context of agnosticism, God has also been conceived as the source of all moral obligation, and the greatest conceivable existent. Many notable philosophers have developed arguments for and against the existence of God, there are many names for God, and different names are attached to different cultural ideas about Gods identity and attributes. In the ancient Egyptian era of Atenism, possibly the earliest recorded monotheistic religion, this deity was called Aten, premised on being the one true Supreme Being and creator of the universe. In the Hebrew Bible and Judaism, He Who Is, I Am that I Am, in the Christian doctrine of the Trinity, God, consubstantial in three persons, is called the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. In Judaism, it is common to refer to God by the titular names Elohim or Adonai, in Islam, the name Allah is used, while Muslims also have a multitude of titular names for God. In Hinduism, Brahman is often considered a concept of God. In Chinese religion, God is conceived as the progenitor of the universe, intrinsic to it, other religions have names for God, for instance, Baha in the Baháí Faith, Waheguru in Sikhism, and Ahura Mazda in Zoroastrianism. The earliest written form of the Germanic word God comes from the 6th-century Christian Codex Argenteus, the English word itself is derived from the Proto-Germanic * ǥuđan. The reconstructed Proto-Indo-European form * ǵhu-tó-m was likely based on the root * ǵhau-, in the English language, the capitalized form of God continues to represent a distinction between monotheistic God and gods in polytheism. The same holds for Hebrew El, but in Judaism, God is also given a proper name, in many translations of the Bible, when the word LORD is in all capitals, it signifies that the word represents the tetragrammaton. Allāh is the Arabic term with no plural used by Muslims and Arabic speaking Christians and Jews meaning The God, Ahura Mazda is the name for God used in Zoroastrianism. Mazda, or rather the Avestan stem-form Mazdā-, nominative Mazdå and it is generally taken to be the proper name of the spirit, and like its Sanskrit cognate medhā, means intelligence or wisdom. Both the Avestan and Sanskrit words reflect Proto-Indo-Iranian *mazdhā-, from Proto-Indo-European mn̩sdʰeh1, literally meaning placing ones mind, Waheguru is a term most often used in Sikhism to refer to God
21.
Christianity
–
Christianity is a Abrahamic monotheistic religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus Christ, who serves as the focal point for the religion. It is the worlds largest religion, with over 2.4 billion followers, or 33% of the global population, Christians believe that Jesus is the Son of God and the savior of humanity whose coming as the Messiah was prophesied in the Old Testament. Christian theology is summarized in creeds such as the Apostles Creed and his incarnation, earthly ministry, crucifixion, and resurrection are often referred to as the gospel, meaning good news. The term gospel also refers to accounts of Jesuss life and teaching, four of which—Matthew, Mark, Luke. Christianity is an Abrahamic religion that began as a Second Temple Judaic sect in the mid-1st century, following the Age of Discovery, Christianity spread to the Americas, Australasia, sub-Saharan Africa, and the rest of the world through missionary work and colonization. Christianity has played a prominent role in the shaping of Western civilization, throughout its history, Christianity has weathered schisms and theological disputes that have resulted in many distinct churches and denominations. Worldwide, the three largest branches of Christianity are the Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, and the denominations of Protestantism. There are many important differences of interpretation and opinion of the Bible, concise doctrinal statements or confessions of religious beliefs are known as creeds. They began as baptismal formulae and were expanded during the Christological controversies of the 4th and 5th centuries to become statements of faith. Many evangelical Protestants reject creeds as definitive statements of faith, even agreeing with some or all of the substance of the creeds. The Baptists have been non-creedal in that they have not sought to establish binding authoritative confessions of faith on one another. Also rejecting creeds are groups with roots in the Restoration Movement, such as the Christian Church, the Evangelical Christian Church in Canada, the Apostles Creed is the most widely accepted statement of the articles of Christian faith. It is also used by Presbyterians, Methodists, and Congregationalists and this particular creed was developed between the 2nd and 9th centuries. Its central doctrines are those of the Trinity and God the Creator, each of the doctrines found in this creed can be traced to statements current in the apostolic period. The creed was used as a summary of Christian doctrine for baptismal candidates in the churches of Rome. Most Christians accept the use of creeds, and subscribe to at least one of the mentioned above. The central tenet of Christianity is the belief in Jesus as the Son of God, Christians believe that Jesus, as the Messiah, was anointed by God as savior of humanity, and hold that Jesus coming was the fulfillment of messianic prophecies of the Old Testament. The Christian concept of the Messiah differs significantly from the contemporary Jewish concept, Jesus, having become fully human, suffered the pains and temptations of a mortal man, but did not sin
22.
Deism
–
Deism is a philosophical position which posits that a god does not interfere directly with the world. Deism gained prominence among intellectuals during the Age of Enlightenment, especially in Britain, France, Germany, included in those influenced by its ideas were leaders of the American and French Revolutions. These lead to many subdivisions of modern deism which tends, therefore, Deism is a theological theory concerning the relationship between the Creator and the natural world. Deistic viewpoints emerged during the revolution of 17th Century Europe. Deism stood between the narrow dogmatism of the period and skepticism, though deists rejected atheism, they often were called atheists by more traditional theists. There were a number of different forms in the 17th and 18th Centuries, in England, deism included a range of people from anti-Christian to non-Christian theists. See the section Features of deism, following, Deism is related to naturalism because it credits the formation of life and the universe to a higher power, using only natural processes. Deism may also include an element, involving experiences of God. The words deism and theism are both derived from words for god, the former from Latin deus, the latter from Greek theós, prior to the 17th Century the terms were used interchangeably with the terms theism and theist, respectively. Theologians and philosophers of the 17th Century began to give a different signification to the words, both asserted belief in one supreme God, the Creator. Perhaps the first use of the term deist is in Pierre Virets Instruction Chrétienne en la doctrine de la foi et de lÉvangile, Viret, a Calvinist, regarded deism as a new form of Italian heresy. I have heard there are of this band those who call themselves Deists, an entirely new word. In England, the term deist first appeared in Robert Burtons The Anatomy of Melancholy, Lord Herbert of Cherbury is generally considered the father of English Deism, and his book De Veritate the first major statement of deism. Deism flourished in England between 1690 and 1740, at which time Matthew Tindals Christianity as Old as the Creation, also called The Deists Bible, later deism spread to France, notably through the work of Voltaire, to Germany, and to the United States. The concept of deism covers a variety of positions on a wide variety of religious issues. Sir Leslie Stephens English Thought in the Eighteenth Century describes the core of deism as consisting of critical and constructional elements, critical elements of deist thought included, Rejection of religions that are based on books that claim to contain the revealed word of God. Rejection of religious dogma and demagogy, Skepticism of reports of miracles, prophecies and religious mysteries. Constructional elements of deist thought included, God exists and created the universe, God gave humans the ability to reason
23.
Isaac Newton
–
His book Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica, first published in 1687, laid the foundations of classical mechanics. Newton also made contributions to optics, and he shares credit with Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz for developing the infinitesimal calculus. Newtons Principia formulated the laws of motion and universal gravitation that dominated scientists view of the universe for the next three centuries. Newtons work on light was collected in his influential book Opticks. He also formulated a law of cooling, made the first theoretical calculation of the speed of sound. Newton was a fellow of Trinity College and the second Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at the University of Cambridge, politically and personally tied to the Whig party, Newton served two brief terms as Member of Parliament for the University of Cambridge, in 1689–90 and 1701–02. He was knighted by Queen Anne in 1705 and he spent the last three decades of his life in London, serving as Warden and Master of the Royal Mint and his father, also named Isaac Newton, had died three months before. Born prematurely, he was a child, his mother Hannah Ayscough reportedly said that he could have fit inside a quart mug. When Newton was three, his mother remarried and went to live with her new husband, the Reverend Barnabas Smith, leaving her son in the care of his maternal grandmother, Newtons mother had three children from her second marriage. From the age of twelve until he was seventeen, Newton was educated at The Kings School, Grantham which taught Latin and Greek. He was removed from school, and by October 1659, he was to be found at Woolsthorpe-by-Colsterworth, Henry Stokes, master at the Kings School, persuaded his mother to send him back to school so that he might complete his education. Motivated partly by a desire for revenge against a bully, he became the top-ranked student. In June 1661, he was admitted to Trinity College, Cambridge and he started as a subsizar—paying his way by performing valets duties—until he was awarded a scholarship in 1664, which guaranteed him four more years until he would get his M. A. He set down in his notebook a series of Quaestiones about mechanical philosophy as he found it, in 1665, he discovered the generalised binomial theorem and began to develop a mathematical theory that later became calculus. Soon after Newton had obtained his B. A. degree in August 1665, in April 1667, he returned to Cambridge and in October was elected as a fellow of Trinity. Fellows were required to become ordained priests, although this was not enforced in the restoration years, however, by 1675 the issue could not be avoided and by then his unconventional views stood in the way. Nevertheless, Newton managed to avoid it by means of a special permission from Charles II. A and he was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society in 1672. Newtons work has been said to distinctly advance every branch of mathematics then studied and his work on the subject usually referred to as fluxions or calculus, seen in a manuscript of October 1666, is now published among Newtons mathematical papers
24.
Charles Darwin
–
Charles Robert Darwin, FRS FRGS FLS FZS was an English naturalist, geologist and biologist, best known for his contributions to the science of evolution. Darwin published his theory of evolution with compelling evidence in his 1859 book On the Origin of Species, by the 1870s, the scientific community and much of the general public had accepted evolution as a fact. In modified form, Darwins scientific discovery is the theory of the life sciences. Darwins early interest in nature led him to neglect his education at the University of Edinburgh, instead. Studies at the University of Cambridge encouraged his passion for natural science, puzzled by the geographical distribution of wildlife and fossils he collected on the voyage, Darwin began detailed investigations and in 1838 conceived his theory of natural selection. Although he discussed his ideas with several naturalists, he needed time for extensive research and he was writing up his theory in 1858 when Alfred Russel Wallace sent him an essay that described the same idea, prompting immediate joint publication of both of their theories. Darwins work established evolutionary descent with modification as the dominant scientific explanation of diversification in nature, in 1871 he examined human evolution and sexual selection in The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex, followed by The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals. His research on plants was published in a series of books, Darwin has been described as one of the most influential figures in human history, and he was honoured by burial in Westminster Abbey. Charles Robert Darwin was born in Shrewsbury, Shropshire, on 12 February 1809, at his familys home and he was the fifth of six children of wealthy society doctor and financier Robert Darwin and Susannah Darwin. He was the grandson of two prominent abolitionists, Erasmus Darwin on his fathers side, and Josiah Wedgwood on his mothers side, both families were largely Unitarian, though the Wedgwoods were adopting Anglicanism. The eight-year-old Charles already had a taste for history and collecting when he joined the day school run by its preacher in 1817. From September 1818, he joined his older brother Erasmus attending the nearby Anglican Shrewsbury School as a boarder and he found lectures dull and surgery distressing, so neglected his studies. He learned taxidermy in around 40 daily hour-long sessions from John Edmonstone, one day, Grant praised Lamarcks evolutionary ideas. Darwin was astonished by Grants audacity, but had recently read similar ideas in his grandfather Erasmus journals, Darwin was rather bored by Robert Jamesons natural-history course, which covered geology - including the debate between Neptunism and Plutonism. He learned the classification of plants, and assisted with work on the collections of the University Museum, as Darwin was unqualified for the Tripos, he joined the ordinary degree course in January 1828. He preferred riding and shooting to studying, when his own exams drew near, Darwin focused on his studies and was delighted by the language and logic of William Paleys Evidences of Christianity. In his final examination in January 1831 Darwin did well, coming out of 178 candidates for the ordinary degree. Darwin had to stay at Cambridge until June 1831, inspired with a burning zeal to contribute, Darwin planned to visit Tenerife with some classmates after graduation to study natural history in the tropics
25.
Scientific theory
–
Established scientific theories have withstood rigorous scrutiny and are a comprehensive form of scientific knowledge. It is important to note that the definition of a theory as used in the disciplines of science is significantly different from the common vernacular usage of the word theory. These different usages are comparable to the differing, and often opposing, usages of the prediction in science versus prediction in vernacular speech. The strength of a theory is related to the diversity of phenomena it can explain. In certain cases, the less-accurate unmodified scientific theory can still be treated as an if it is useful as an approximation under specific conditions. Scientific theories are testable and make falsifiable predictions and they describe the causal elements responsible for a particular natural phenomenon, and are used to explain and predict aspects of the physical universe or specific areas of inquiry. Scientists use theories as a foundation to further scientific knowledge. As with other forms of knowledge, scientific theories are both deductive and inductive in nature and aim for predictive power and explanatory capability. Paleontologist, evolutionary biologist, and science historian Stephen Jay Gould said, “. facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. ”The defining characteristic of all scientific knowledge, the relevance and specificity of those predictions determine how potentially useful the theory is. A would-be theory that makes no observable predictions is not a theory at all. Predictions not sufficiently specific to be tested are similarly not useful, in both cases, the term theory is not applicable. A body of descriptions of knowledge can be called a theory if it fulfills the following criteria and it is well-supported by many independent strands of evidence, rather than a single foundation. It is consistent with preexisting experimental results and at least as accurate in its predictions as are any preexisting theories and these qualities are certainly true of such established theories as special and general relativity, quantum mechanics, plate tectonics, the modern evolutionary synthesis, etc. It is among the most parsimonious explanations, economical in the use of proposed entities or explanatory steps as per Occams razor. The United States National Academy of Sciences defines scientific theories as follows and it refers to a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence. Such fact-supported theories are not guesses but reliable accounts of the real world, the theory of biological evolution is more than just a theory. It is as factual an explanation of the universe as the theory of matter or the germ theory of disease
26.
Natural selection
–
Natural selection is the differential survival and reproduction of individuals due to differences in phenotype. It is a key mechanism of evolution, the change in heritable traits of a population over time, Charles Darwin popularised the term natural selection, and compared it with artificial selection. Variation exists within all populations of organisms and this occurs partly because random mutations arise in the genome of an individual organism, and offspring can inherit such mutations. Throughout the lives of the individuals, their genomes interact with their environments to cause variations in traits, the environment of a genome includes the molecular biology in the cell, other cells, other individuals, populations, species, as well as the abiotic environment. Individuals with certain variants of the trait may survive and reproduce more than individuals with other, less successful, variants, therefore, factors that affect reproductive success are also important, including sexual selection and fecundity selection. Over time, this process can result in populations that specialise for particular ecological niches, in other words, natural selection is a key process in the evolution of a population. Natural selection can be contrasted with artificial selection, in which humans intentionally choose specific traits, Natural selection is one of the cornerstones of modern biology. The concept of natural selection originally developed in the absence of a theory of heredity, at the time of Darwins writing. The union of traditional Darwinian evolution with subsequent discoveries in classical genetics formed the synthesis of the mid-20th century. The addition of molecular genetics has led to developmental biology. While genotypes can slowly change by random genetic drift, natural selection remains the primary explanation for adaptive evolution, empedocles idea that organisms arose entirely by the incidental workings of causes such as heat and cold was criticised by Aristotle in Book II of Physics. He posited natural teleology in its place, and believed that form was achieved for a purpose, nevertheless, he accepted in his biology that new types of animals, monstrosities, can occur in very rare instances. And in like manner as to the parts in which there appears to exist an adaptation to an end. Yet it is impossible that this should be the true view, for teeth and all other natural things either invariably or normally come about in a given way, but of not one of the results of chance or spontaneity is this true. We do not ascribe to chance or mere coincidence the frequency of rain in winter, but frequent rain in summer we do, nor heat in the dog-days, therefore action for an end is present in things which come to be and are by nature. The struggle for existence was later described by the Islamic writer Al-Jahiz in the 9th century, the classical arguments were reintroduced in the 18th century by Pierre Louis Maupertuis and others, including Darwins grandfather, Erasmus Darwin. Until the early 19th century, the view in Western societies was that differences between individuals of a species were uninteresting departures from their Platonic ideals of created kinds. However, the theory of uniformitarianism in geology promoted the idea that simple and this theory, Lamarckism, was an influence on the Soviet biologist Trofim Lysenkos antagonism to mainstream genetic theory as late as the mid 20th century
27.
Adaptation
–
In biology, an adaptation, also called an adaptive trait, is a trait with a current functional role in the life of an organism that is maintained and evolved by means of natural selection. Adaptation refers to both the current state of being adapted and to the evolutionary process that leads to the adaptation. Adaptations enhance the fitness and survival of individuals, organisms face a succession of environmental challenges as they grow and develop and are equipped with an adaptive plasticity as the phenotype of traits develop in response to the imposed conditions. The developmental norm of reaction for any given trait is essential to the correction of adaptation as it affords a kind of insurance or resilience to varying environments. Adaptation is, first of all, a process, to rather be with the animal, an internal parasite can illustrate the distinction, such a parasite may have a very simple bodily structure, but nevertheless the organism is highly adapted to its specific environment. From this we see that adaptation is not just a matter of visible traits, in such parasites critical adaptations take place in the life cycle, however, as a practical term, adaptation often refers to a product, those features of a species which result from the process. Many aspects of an animal or plant can be correctly called adaptations, by using the term adaptation for the evolutionary process, and adaptive trait for the bodily part or function, one may distinguish the two different senses of the word. Adaptation is one of the two processes that explain the diverse species found in biology, such as the different species of Darwins finches. The other process is speciation, caused by geographical isolation or some other mechanism, a favorite example used today to study the interplay of adaptation and speciation is the evolution of cichlid fish in African lakes, where the question of reproductive isolation is much more complex. Adaptation is not always a simple matter where the ideal phenotype evolves for an external environment. An organism must be viable at all stages of its development and this places constraints on the evolution of development, behavior and structure of organisms. However, it is not clear what relatively small should mean, the origin of eukaryotic symbiosis exemplifies a more dramatic example. All adaptations help organisms survive in their ecological niches, the adaptive traits may be structural, behavioral or physiological. Structural adaptations are features of an organism. Behavioral adaptations are composed of inherited behavior chains and/or the ability to learn, behaviors may be inherited in detail, examples, searching for food, mating, vocalizations. Adaptation, then, affects all aspects of the life of an organism, the following definitions are mainly due to Theodosius Dobzhansky. Adaptation is the process whereby an organism becomes better able to live in its habitat or habitats. Adaptedness is the state of being adapted, the degree to which an organism is able to live, an adaptive trait is an aspect of the developmental pattern of the organism which enables or enhances the probability of that organism surviving and reproducing
28.
Evolutionary biology
–
Evolutionary biology is the subfield of biology that studies the evolutionary processes that produced the diversity of life on Earth, starting from a single origin of life. These processes include natural selection, common descent, and speciation, the study of evolution is the central unifying concept in biology. Biology can be divided in various ways, one way is by the level of biological organisation, from molecular to cell, organism to population. Another way is by taxonomic group, with such as zoology, ornithology. A third way is by approach, such as biology, theoretical biology, experimental evolution. These alternative ways of dividing up the subject can be combined with evolutionary biology to create subfields like evolutionary ecology, Evolutionary biology, as an academic discipline in its own right, emerged during the period of the modern evolutionary synthesis in the 1930s and 1940s. It was not until the 1980s that many universities had departments of evolutionary biology, in the United States, many universities have created departments of molecular and cell biology or ecology and evolutionary biology, in place of the older departments of botany and zoology. Palaeontology is often grouped with earth science, microbiology too is becoming an evolutionary discipline, now that microbial physiology and genomics are better understood. The quick generation time of bacteria and viruses such as makes it possible to explore evolutionary questions. Many biologists have contributed to our current understanding of evolution, ford established an empirical research programme. Ronald Fisher, Sewall Wright and J. S. Haldane created a theoretical framework. Ernst Mayr in systematics, George Gaylord Simpson in palaeontology and G. Ledyard Stebbins in botany helped to form the modern synthesis, james Crow, Richard Lewontin, Dan Hartl, Marcus Feldman, and Brian Charlesworth trained a generation of evolutionary biologists. Current research in evolutionary biology covers diverse topics and incorporates ideas from diverse areas, such as molecular genetics, first, some fields of evolutionary research try to explain phenomena that were poorly accounted for in the modern evolutionary synthesis. These include speciation, the evolution of reproduction, the evolution of cooperation, the evolution of ageing. Second, biologists ask the most straightforward evolutionary question, what happened and this includes fields such as palaeobiology, as well as systematics and phylogenetics. Third, the evolutionary synthesis was devised at a time when nobody understood the molecular basis of genes. Today, evolutionary biologists try to determine the architecture of interesting evolutionary phenomena such as adaptation and speciation. They try to reconcile the high heritability seen in studies with the difficulty in finding which genes are responsible for this heritability using genome-wide association studies
29.
Richard Dawkins
–
Clinton Richard Dawkins FRS FRSL is an English ethologist, evolutionary biologist and author. He is a fellow of New College, Oxford, and was the University of Oxfords Professor for Public Understanding of Science from 1995 until 2008. Dawkins first came to prominence with his 1976 book The Selfish Gene, in 2006, he founded the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science. Dawkins is an atheist, and is known for his criticism of creationism. In The Blind Watchmaker, he argues against the watchmaker analogy, instead, he describes evolutionary processes as analogous to a blind watchmaker in that reproduction, mutation, and selection are unguided by any designer. In The God Delusion, Dawkins contends that a supernatural creator almost certainly does not exist and he opposes the teaching of creationism in schools. Dawkins was born in Nairobi, then in British Kenya, on 26 March 1941 and he is the son of Jean Mary Vyvyan and Clinton John Dawkins, who was an agricultural civil servant in the British Colonial Service in Nyasaland. His father was called up into the Kings African Rifles during World War II and returned to England in 1949 and his father had inherited a country estate, Over Norton Park in Oxfordshire, which he farmed commercially. Dawkins considers himself English and lives in Oxford, England, both his parents were interested in natural sciences, and they answered Dawkinss questions in scientific terms. Dawkins describes his childhood as a normal Anglican upbringing, and that left me with nothing. From 1954 to 1959 Dawkins attended Oundle School in Northamptonshire, an English public school with a distinct Church of England flavour, while at Oundle Dawkins read Bertrand Russells Why I Am Not a Christian for the first time. He studied zoology at Balliol College, Oxford, graduating in 1962, while there and he continued as a research student under Tinbergens supervision, receiving his MA and DPhil degrees by 1966, and remained a research assistant for another year. Tinbergen was a pioneer in the study of behaviour, particularly in the areas of instinct, learning and choice. From 1967 to 1969, he was an assistant professor of zoology at the University of California, during this period, the students and faculty at UC Berkeley were largely opposed to the ongoing Vietnam War, and Dawkins became involved in the anti-war demonstrations and activities. He returned to the University of Oxford in 1970 as a lecturer, in 1990, he became a reader in zoology. He held that professorship from 1995 until 2008, since 1970, he has been a fellow of New College, Oxford and he is now an emeritus fellow. In 1991, he gave the Royal Institution Christmas Lectures for Children on Growing Up in the Universe and he has also edited several journals, and has acted as editorial advisor to the Encarta Encyclopedia and the Encyclopedia of Evolution. He is listed as an editor and a columnist of the Council for Secular Humanisms Free Inquiry magazine
30.
The Blind Watchmaker
–
He also presents arguments to refute certain criticisms made on his first book, The Selfish Gene. An unabridged audiobook edition was released in 2011, narrated by Richard Dawkins, in his choice of the title for this book, Dawkins refers to the watchmaker analogy made famous by William Paley in his 1802 book Natural Theology. To dispel the idea that complexity cannot arise without the intervention of a creator, in making this journey, he points to several creatures whose various seeing apparatus are, whilst still useful, living examples of intermediate levels of complexity. He demonstrates this by the example of the weasel program, the program displayed a two dimensional shape made up of straight black lines, the length, position, and angle of which were defined by a simple set of rules and instructions. Adding new lines based on these rules offered a set of possible new shapes. The chosen mutation would then be the basis for generation of biomorph mutants to be chosen from. Thus, the user, by selection, could steer the evolution of biomorphs and this process often produced images which were reminiscent of real organisms for instance beetles, bats, or trees. He dubbed this insight the evolution of evolvability, must already have been vastly complex in the first place. He calls this postulating organized complexity without offering an explanation and he notes that analogies with computer programs have their limitations, but are still useful. Ghiselin observes that Dawkins is NOT content with rebutting creationists but goes on to press home his arguments against alternative theories to neo-Darwinism and he thinks the book fills the need to know more about evolution that others would conceal from them. He concludes that Readers who are not outraged will be delighted and he notes that Dawkins demolishes several weak arguments, such as the argument from personal incredulity. He denies that Dawkinss computer exercises and arguments from gradual change show that forms of life could have evolved. Willard concludes by arguing that in writing this book, Dawkins is not functioning as a scientist in the line of Darwin, the engineer Theo Jansen read the book in 1986 and became fascinated by evolution and natural selection. Since 1990 he has been building kinetic sculptures, the Strandbeest, the journalist Dick Pountain described Sean B. Carrolls 2005 account of developmental biology, Endless Forms Most Beautiful, as the most important popular science book since The Blind Watchmaker. New York, W. W. Norton & Company, Inc, evolution for those that have ears. We Are All Contraptions – review by Michael Ghiselin
31.
Evolution
–
Evolution is change in the heritable characteristics of biological populations over successive generations. Evolutionary processes give rise to biodiversity at every level of organisation, including the levels of species, individual organisms. In July 2016, scientists reported identifying a set of 355 genes from the LUCA of all living on Earth. The fossil record includes a progression from early biogenic graphite, to microbial mat fossils, existing patterns of biodiversity have been shaped both by speciation and by extinction. More than 99 percent of all species that lived on Earth are estimated to be extinct. Estimates of Earths current species range from 10 to 14 million, more recently, in May 2016, scientists reported that 1 trillion species are estimated to be on Earth currently with only one-thousandth of one percent described. In the mid-19th century, Charles Darwin formulated the theory of evolution by natural selection. This teleonomy is the quality whereby the process of natural selection creates and preserves traits that are fitted for the functional roles they perform. The processes by which the changes occur, from one generation to another, are called evolutionary processes or mechanisms, the four most widely recognized evolutionary processes are natural selection, genetic drift, mutation and gene migration. Natural selection and genetic drift sort variation, mutation and gene migration create variation, consequences of selection can include meiotic drive, nonrandom mating and genetic hitchhiking. In the early 20th century the modern evolutionary synthesis integrated classical genetics with Darwins theory of evolution by natural selection through the discipline of population genetics, the importance of natural selection as a cause of evolution was accepted into other branches of biology. Moreover, previously held notions about evolution, such as orthogenesis, evolutionism, evolutionary computation, a sub-field of artificial intelligence, involves the application of Darwinian principles to problems in computer science. The proposal that one type of organism could descend from another type goes back to some of the first pre-Socratic Greek philosophers, such as Anaximander, such proposals survived into Roman times. The poet and philosopher Lucretius followed Empedocles in his masterwork De rerum natura, in contrast to these materialistic views, Aristotelianism considered all natural things as actualisations of fixed natural possibilities, known as forms. This was part of a teleological understanding of nature in which all things have an intended role to play in a divine cosmic order. In the 17th century, the new method of modern science rejected the Aristotelian approach, however, this new approach was slow to take root in the biological sciences, the last bastion of the concept of fixed natural types. The biological classification introduced by Carl Linnaeus in 1735 explicitly recognized the nature of species relationships. Other naturalists of this time speculated on the change of species over time according to natural laws
32.
Uniformitarianism
–
Uniformitarianism is the assumption that the same natural laws and processes that operate in the universe now have always operated in the universe in the past and apply everywhere in the universe. Though an unprovable postulate that cannot be verified using the scientific method, coined by William Whewell, it was originally proposed in contrast to catastrophism by British naturalists in the late 18th century, starting with the work of the Scottish geologist James Hutton. Huttons work was refined by John Playfair and popularised by Charles Lyells Principles of Geology in 1830. The earlier conceptions likely had influence on 18th-century European geological explanations for the formation of Earth. Abraham Gottlob Werner proposed Neptunism, where strata represented deposits from shrinking seas precipitated onto primordial rocks such as granite, in 1785 James Hutton proposed an opposing, self-maintaining infinite cycle based on natural history and not on the Biblical account. The solid parts of the present land appear in general, to have composed of the productions of the sea. Hence we find reason to conclude, 1st, That the land on which we rest is not simple and original, but that it is a composition, and had been formed by the operation of second causes. 2nd, That before the present land was made, there had subsisted a world composed of sea and land, in which were tides and currents, with such operations at the bottom of the sea as now take place. Both Playfair and Hall wrote their own books on the theory, georges Cuviers paleontological work in the 1790s, which established the reality of extinction, explained this by local catastrophes, after which other fixed species repopulated the affected areas. From 1830 to 1833 Charles Lyells multi-volume Principles of Geology was published, the works subtitle was An attempt to explain the former changes of the Earths surface by reference to causes now in operation. The terms uniformitarianism for this idea, and catastrophism for the opposing viewpoint, were coined by William Whewell in a review of Lyells book, Principles of Geology was the most influential geological work in the middle of the 19th century. According to Reijer Hooykaas, Lyells uniformitarianism is a family of four related propositions, not an idea, Uniformity of law – the laws of nature are constant across time. Uniformity of methodology – the appropriate hypotheses for explaining the geological past are those with analogy today, Uniformity of kind – past and present causes are all of the same kind, have the same energy, and produce the same effects. Uniformity of degree – geological circumstances have remained the same over time, none of these connotations requires another, and they are not all equally inferred by uniformitarians. The four together make up Lyells uniformitarianism, the two methodological assumptions below are accepted to be true by the majority of scientists and geologists. Gould claims that these propositions must be assumed before you can proceed as a scientist doing science. You cannot go to an outcrop and observe either the constancy of natures laws or the working of unknown processes. It works the way around
33.
Deistic evolution
–
The position is a counterpoint to theistic evolution and is endorsed by those who believe in both deism and the veracity of science. This is the view that God began the process of evolution, producing the first matter, thus, he programmed the process and then withdrew from active involvement with the world, becoming, so to speak, Creator Emeritus. God is the Creator, the cause, but evolution is the means. Deistic evolution has little difficulty with the scientific data, there is a definite conflict, however, between deisms view of an absentee God and the biblical picture of a God who has been involved in a whole series of creative acts. In particular, both Genesis accounts of the origin of human beings indicate that God definitely and distinctly willed and acted to bring them into existence. Any deistic God is not around for prayers, miracles or to intervene in peoples lives, Deistic Evolution adheres to the concept of some form of God, but denies any personal God. A recent defender of deistic evolution was Michael Anthony Corey, author of the book Back to Darwin, some scholars have written that Charles Darwin was an advocate of deistic evolution. Deistic evolution is similarly the operative idea in Pandeism, which has been counted amongst the handful of beliefs which are compatible with modern science. And specifically wherein it is noted that pandeistic belief systems, the inclusion of God as the ever unfolding expression of a complex universe with an identifiable beginning but no teleological direction necessarily present. Deistic evolution is not the same as theistic evolution, yet they are sometimes confused, M. J. Charles P. Theistic Deism and evolution is possible, but deistic evolution is a contradiction in terms. Again, it is all a mere supposition that God created the world and it is impossible for us to say that God put forth energy in the beginning and then ceased. It is, to say the least, as probable that gravitation is a divine force constantly exerted on matter in a way as that it is a divine force deposited in matter once for all. Deistic evolution does not oppose or contradict evolution or come into conflict with science as it says that a God started the process, however deism is still a religious philosophy. All development since this creative act merely follows laws and principles which He created, God created the universe. He set up basic laws to govern the running of the universe, God has not been seen since. The earth coalesced about 4 or 5 thousand million years ago without any input from God, later, elementary life forms formed, which evolved into the animals and plant life that we see today through purely natural forces. It is essentially identical to naturalistic evolution, excepts that it reserves one action for God and this belief is common among Deists. Although the term is heard, deistic evolution is perhaps the best way to describe one variety of what is generally called theistic evolution
34.
William Paley
–
William Paley was an English clergyman, Christian apologist, philosopher, and utilitarian. Paley was born in Peterborough, England, and was educated at Giggleswick School, of which his father was headmaster and he graduated in 1763 as senior wrangler, became fellow in 1766, and in 1768 tutor of his college. He was also a supporter of the American colonies during the revolutionary war. In 1776 Paley was presented to the rectory of Musgrave in Westmorland and he was subsequently made vicar of Dalston in 1780, near the bishops palace at Rose Castle. In 1782 he became the Archdeacon of Carlisle, in 1782 Edmund Law, otherwise the mildest of men, was most particular that Paley should add a book on political philosophy to the moral philosophy, which Paley was reluctant to write. The book was published in 1785 under the title of The Principles of Moral and Political Philosophy and it passed through fifteen editions in the authors lifetime. Paley strenuously supported the abolition of the trade, and his attack on slavery in the book was instrumental in drawing greater public attention to the practice. In 1789, a speech he gave on the subject in Carlisle was published, Some have said this book was the most original of Paleys works. It was followed in 1794 by the celebrated View of the Evidences of Christianity and he died on 25 May 1805 and is buried in Carlisle Cathedral with his two wives. His second son was the architect Edward Graham Paley and his grandson was the classical scholar Frederick Apthorp Paley, Paleys Principles of Moral and Political Philosophy was one of the most influential philosophical texts in late Enlightenment Britain. It was cited in several debates over the corn laws in Britain and in debates in the US Congress. The book remained a set textbook at Cambridge well into the Victorian era, portraits of Paley and Darwin face each other at Christ College still today. Paley is also remembered for his contributions to the philosophy of religion, utilitarian ethics, in 1802, he published Natural Theology, or, Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity, his last book. The main thrust of his argument was that Gods design of the whole creation could be seen in the happiness, or well-being. Paleys argument is built mainly around anatomy and natural history, in making his argument, Paley employed a wide variety of metaphors and analogies. Perhaps the most famous is his analogy between a watch and the world, historians, philosophers and theologians often call this the Watchmaker analogy. Building on this analogy, Paley presents examples from planetary astronomy. To bolster his views he cites the work of his old friend John Law, the germ of the idea is to be found in ancient writers who used sundials and Ptolemaic epicycles to illustrate the divine order of the world
35.
Scientific revolution
–
While its dates are debated, the publication in 1543 of Nicolaus Copernicuss De revolutionibus orbium coelestium is often cited as marking the beginning of the scientific revolution. By the end of the 18th century, the revolution had given way to the Age of Reflection. Great advances in science have been termed revolutions since the 18th century, in 1747, Clairaut wrote that Newton was said in his own lifetime to have created a revolution. The word was used in the preface to Lavoisiers 1789 work announcing the discovery of oxygen. Few revolutions in science have immediately excited so much general notice as the introduction of the theory of oxygen, lavoisier saw his theory accepted by all the most eminent men of his time, and established over a great part of Europe within a few years from its first promulgation. In the 19th century, William Whewell described the revolution in science itself -- the scientific method -- that had taken place in the 15th–16th century. This gave rise to the view of the scientific revolution today, A new view of nature emerged. Science became a discipline, distinct from both philosophy and technology and came to be regarded as having utilitarian goals. The scientific revolution is traditionally assumed to start with the Copernican Revolution, in the 20th century, Alexandre Koyré introduced the term scientific revolution, centering his analysis on Galileo. The term was popularized by Butterfield in his Origins of Modern Science, the scientific revolution led to the establishment of several modern sciences. In 1984, Joseph Ben-David wrote, Rapid accumulation of knowledge, the new kind of scientific activity emerged only in a few countries of Western Europe, and it was restricted to that small area for about two hundred years. Many contemporary writers and modern historians claim that there was a change in world view. Looms so large as the origin both of the modern world and of the modern mentality that our customary periodization of European history has become an anachronism. Some scholars have noted a direct tie between particular aspects of traditional Christianity and the rise of science, the Aristotelian tradition was still an important intellectual framework in the 17th century, although by that time natural philosophers had moved away from much of it. Key scientific ideas dating back to classical antiquity had changed drastically over the years, the ideas that remained, which were transformed fundamentally during the scientific revolution, include, Aristotles cosmology that placed the Earth at the center of a spherical hierarchic cosmos. The terrestrial and celestial regions were made up of different elements which had different kinds of natural movement, the terrestrial region, according to Aristotle, consisted of concentric spheres of the four elements—earth, water, air, and fire. All bodies naturally moved in straight lines until they reached the sphere appropriate to their elemental composition—their natural place, all other terrestrial motions were non-natural, or violent. The celestial region was made up of the element, aether
36.
Cicero
–
Marcus Tullius Cicero was a Roman philosopher, politician, lawyer, orator, political theorist, consul, and constitutionalist. He came from a wealthy family of the Roman equestrian order. According to Michael Grant, the influence of Cicero upon the history of European literature, Cicero introduced the Romans to the chief schools of Greek philosophy and created a Latin philosophical vocabulary distinguishing himself as a translator and philosopher. Though he was an orator and successful lawyer, Cicero believed his political career was his most important achievement. During the chaotic latter half of the 1st century BC marked by civil wars, following Julius Caesars death, Cicero became an enemy of Mark Antony in the ensuing power struggle, attacking him in a series of speeches. His severed hands and head were then, as a revenge of Mark Antony. Petrarchs rediscovery of Ciceros letters is often credited for initiating the 14th-century Renaissance in public affairs, humanism, according to Polish historian Tadeusz Zieliński, the Renaissance was above all things a revival of Cicero, and only after him and through him of the rest of Classical antiquity. Cicero was born in 106 BC in Arpinum, a hill town 100 kilometers southeast of Rome and his father was a well-to-do member of the equestrian order and possessed good connections in Rome. However, being a semi-invalid, he could not enter public life, although little is known about Ciceros mother, Helvia, it was common for the wives of important Roman citizens to be responsible for the management of the household. Ciceros brother Quintus wrote in a letter that she was a thrifty housewife, Ciceros cognomen, or personal surname, comes from the Latin for chickpea, cicer. Plutarch explains that the name was given to one of Ciceros ancestors who had a cleft in the tip of his nose resembling a chickpea. However, it is likely that Ciceros ancestors prospered through the cultivation. Romans often chose down-to-earth personal surnames, the family names of Fabius, Lentulus, and Piso come from the Latin names of beans, lentils. Plutarch writes that Cicero was urged to change this name when he entered politics. During this period in Roman history, cultured meant being able to speak both Latin and Greek, Cicero used his knowledge of Greek to translate many of the theoretical concepts of Greek philosophy into Latin, thus translating Greek philosophical works for a larger audience. It was precisely his broad education that tied him to the traditional Roman elite, according to Plutarch, Cicero was an extremely talented student, whose learning attracted attention from all over Rome, affording him the opportunity to study Roman law under Quintus Mucius Scaevola. Ciceros fellow students were Gaius Marius Minor, Servius Sulpicius Rufus, the latter two became Ciceros friends for life, and Pomponius would become, in Ciceros own words, as a second brother, with both maintaining a lifelong correspondence. Cicero wanted to pursue a career in politics along the steps of the Cursus honorum
. PMID 17494747.
