Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Design Inference vs. Design Hypothesis

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Evolutionnews.org just published an article by me titled “Design Inference vs. Design Hypothesis.” Here is an excerpt:

The logic of the design inference moves from a marker of intelligence (specified complexity) to an intelligence as causal agent responsible for that marker. The direction of this logic can, however, be reversed. Thus, instead, one can postulate an intelligence operating in nature and therewith formulate predictions and expectations about what one should find in nature if that postulate is true. The logic in this case takes the form of hypothetical reasoning, where a hypothesis is put forward and then its consequences are drawn out and the explanatory fruitfulness of the hypothesis is seen as a way of advancing science and giving credibility to the hypothesis. Stephen Meyer has taken this approach to design reasoning, treating it as an inference to the best explanation in which the hypothesis of design gains credibility because of its power in explanation.

SOURCE: http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/10/design_inferenc064871.html

Comments
Dr Dembski, Thanks for taking the time to write that post. I think the ID community should pursue some of the follow-on questions you postulate. I frequently hear that such research takes significant monetary resources. Any suggestions regarding where and how such research could be done?Jerad
October 1, 2012
October
10
Oct
1
01
2012
02:47 PM
2
02
47
PM
PDT
Absolutely, but Dawkins said that he wins the regressikon game because in the end in all turtles down to physics and chemistry.
But then again, Dawkins doesn't know what he is talking about.Eric Anderson
October 1, 2012
October
10
Oct
1
01
2012
02:25 PM
2
02
25
PM
PDT
bornagain77- Absolutely, but Dawkins said that he wins the regressikon game because in the end in all turtles down to physics and chemistry.Joe
October 1, 2012
October
10
Oct
1
01
2012
12:11 PM
12
12
11
PM
PDT
as to:
Thus, instead, one can postulate an intelligence operating in nature and therewith formulate predictions and expectations about what one should find in nature if that postulate is true.
I believe even Richard Dawkins agreed with this 'an intelligence operating in nature' line of reasoning in the infamous UFO interview with Ben Stein to try to 'explain away' the origin of life 'problem':
Ben Stein vs. Richard Dawkins Interview - video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlZtEjtlirc
bornagain77
October 1, 2012
October
10
Oct
1
01
2012
11:50 AM
11
11
50
AM
PDT
Thus, instead, one can postulate an intelligence operating in nature and therewith formulate predictions and expectations about what one should find in nature if that postulate is true.
What about the alleged intelligence operating before nature to design nature? Would we then postulate an intelligence operating before nature and therewith formulate predictions and expectations about what one should find in nature if that postulate is true? And would that then mean that the evidence for this intelligence is the design itself?Joe
October 1, 2012
October
10
Oct
1
01
2012
11:34 AM
11
11
34
AM
PDT
Bill, thanks for posting this. Looks like a detailed account with a bit of interesting historical context at the beginning. I've just started reading and look forward to finishing the rest.Eric Anderson
October 1, 2012
October
10
Oct
1
01
2012
10:59 AM
10
10
59
AM
PDT
In conclusion, design inferences and design hypotheses are mutually reinforcing. Within the theory of intelligent design, they have a symbiotic relationship. The logic in the two types of reasoning flows in opposite directions. In design inferential reasoning, one looks for markers of intelligence, notably specified complexity, and from there infers that an intelligence was responsible, which in turn prompts further questions about the nature of the design in question (what's the function, what's the history, how does it take advantage of existing designs, etc.). On the other hand, in design hypothetical reasoning, one presupposes a design hypothesis and uses it to generate predictions, expectations, and insights that advance our scientific understanding. On these twin pillars, the design inference and the design hypothesis, rests the scientific theory of intelligent design.
Mung
October 1, 2012
October
10
Oct
1
01
2012
10:47 AM
10
10
47
AM
PDT
1 2

Leave a Reply