The issue of creation is sensitive and has been overtime surrounded by arguments and counterarguments. Different people have presented arguments trying to explain the existence of the universe and all in it. The creation theory, evolution theory and the intelligent philosophy theory are just some of the theories trying to explain the same. The intelligent theory is debatable and seems to support the creation theory although not comprehensively. The theory arguing that the universe was created through an intelligent approach through a teleological order. The theory further conquers with the creation theory in that it gives space for the presence of a designer of the universe who in the creation theory is God. The theory believes the existence of a Christian God. The debate between the scholars who believe in this theory and those who believe in evolution theory is heated and one needs to understand both theories to come up with a comprehensive decision as on which theory to believe in.
The intelligence theory believes in the Christian God as the designer of the universe and all its contents. The theory seems to outweigh the evolution theory by far and acceptability. The issue of the designer of the universe has been an issue of contention with people believing that some happenings cannot happen without the control of a supernatural being. The arguments are forwarded and supported by scholars on both sides with facts but the intelligent theory tends to take an upper hand.
The Intelligent Theory
The intelligent theory of the existence of the universe is a theory trying to explain the creationism of the universe in a different way and against the evolution theory. The theory was put forward by the discovery institute and in a bigger and wide way supports the creation theory. The theory suggests that some occurrences and creation occurred through a guided principal and methodology rather than a through the natural selection method. The theory accepts the existence of the traditional God in the creation theory ho is in this case the Christian God. The theory however distances itself from the religious approach by arguing that the facts sorounding it are more scientifically proved.
The theory in its context puts forward the theistic theory. The theory brings close the existence of God in a scientific sensitive manner. The approach invokes into science the existence of a supernatural being that controls nature and its happenings. The theory has put forward arguments to support this. The arguments include the issues of irreducible complex and the specified complex.
The scients who believe in the evolution theory have come out strongly to oppose the theory. They argue that the policy of natural selection is real and scientifically proved and cannot be withdrawn. They have rejected any extension to the scientific facts and sited flaws in the facts presented all in an attempt to shoot down the argument. In the scientific circles, it has described as pseudoscience with a wider religious approach rather than scientific. It has been termed to
The intelligence theory was advocated for by group of American scholars who have tried to bring to an end the controversy that exists between the creation and the evolution theory. This group of scholars is known to have gone to the federal court in 1989 to fight against the teaching of religious education in schools for its advocacy for the creation theory. The group argued that this was joining the church and the state. The first work on the theory was first published in the book ‘Of Pandes and the People’ in 1989 in a biology text book intended to be used in high schools to teach on the existence of the universe.
The theory was rejected in 2005 as unfit due to its religious approach. In a ruling by the court, the theory was said to be a bleach of the constitution if adopted in school curricula. This happened despite the support it got from the Discovery Institute and the National Centre for Science and Culture.
Thomas Aquinas first brought the theory forward in 13th century. He argued that the species and features on the universe had certain type of control to behave the way they did. He argued that some supernatural force was responsible. He set the pace in introducing God as the unseen instructor responsible for the behavior in the features. In 1802, William Paley explained the concept using the watch maker analogy in defining time and the timely discipline of nature. He explained the perfect nature of the super natural force and the control over the universe. This influenced the opinion of many scientists who had for long taken the existence of God for granted and changed their reasoning and perception. Charles Darwin tried to dissuade the scientist about this by explaining the problem of evil and its poor design through the natural science of selection. The theory had at this time taken root and its effects were being felt all over. It had become accepted in some quarters. The use of the irreducible complexity and the specified complexity made it more acceptable.
The Irreducible Complexity.
The concept was first defined by Michael Behe in the book ‘Of Pandes and the People’ in 1993 and again in his book ‘Darwin’s Black Book’ in 1996. He described the term as a simple system comprised of units correlating to bring functionality and coordination. He described the units as high dependent and the possible malfunction of the system in case of isolation of any single unit within. He used the mousetrap to explain and explain the whole concept. He showed how the parts of the gadget worked in coordination and how the gadget would be unreliable incase one of the parts was missing.
He opposed the natural selection theory as one that would not lead to formation of an irreducible complex system as the process would not be so accurate. He argued that for the natural selection to occur and be exact, and then there had to be a guiding force to make it accurate. The force was at this time a supernatural God. This culminated to existence of God.
The opposes of the theory criticized it a one that lacked facts by trying to force in facts. They argued that the natural selection theory had adequately shown that nature got rid of factors that did not fit into it and had in turn triggered adaptation by excluding rather than adding. The developer of the approach had accepted having used unfounded facts and ration.