The most common objection to ID seems to be that it does not produce any testable hypothesis, and thus is “outside” of science (thus perhaps it would better be argued in a philosophy class). However, what bothers me about this is if science must be testable, then much of cosmology would also be considered inappropriate for a science classroom (no multiverses, no accounts for natural laws-all those would similarly be outside of science and therefore not belong in a science classroom either). — Paulm12
Cite a single unique, repeatable, prediction "ID" makes — 180 Proof
This was my thought too. But along with sayingFrom what I understand, intelligent design isn't considered a scientific theory because it can't be refuted.
We arrive with an issue at how to define “science.” If science only concerns itself with making testable hypothesis, then plenty of theories put forth by scientists are not “science.” I tend to think this more restrictive definition of science is a good thing for the field, because it forces theories to undergo tests-everything else is philosophy. The issue here is that “science” is a loaded word, and plenty of people take that to mean “knowledge” or even “truth.”Why should science be refutable?
Cite a single unique, repeatable, prediction "ID" makes. — 180 Proof
If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like duck, it must be...a duck — Agent Smith
But arguing that science and biblical literalism are in conflict does not mean (mainstream) religious views are irreconcilable with science. — Paulm12
If we relegate only empirically verifiable things to science, then we also need to acknowledge that any attempts to extrapolate these studies to what happened in the past involves (by this definition, non-scientific) justification. And as a result, we further must admit that the best explanation for data may indeed be a non-scientific, non-testable one. — Paulm12
If science only concerns itself with making testable hypothesis, then plenty of theories put forth by scientists are not “science.” — Paulm12
If science only concerns itself with making testable hypothesis, then plenty of theories put forth by scientists are not “science.” — Paulm12
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.