Designed Evolution? The Evidence Isn’t There
Can intelligent design and evolution work together? It’s an intriguing idea that is welcomed by some, but does the scientific evidence support it? On this ID The Future, host Casey Luskin speaks with Dr. Emily Reeves to discuss her contribution to a recent paper critiquing theologian Dr. Rope Kojonen’s proposal that mainstream evolutionary biology and intelligent design have worked in harmony to produce the diversity of life we see on earth.
Dr. Reeves starts by summarizing the Compatibility of Evolution and Design (CED) argument before also summarizing her team’s response to it. “CED is a great work of scholarship,” says Reeves, “but I think its relevance really hinges on whether empirical evidence supports Kojonen’s version of how the design is implemented within evolutionary theory, and then, of course, whether design arguments…are really compatible with evolutionary theory.”
Reeves and Luskin go on to critique Dr. Kojonen’s conception of design. His model posits that the laws of nature have been front-loaded with design by an intelligent designer. But laws are not creative forces on their own – they only describe forces already in action. There’s no empirical evidence that the laws of nature could do the type of heavy lifting required to steer evolutionary processes toward success. As an example, Dr. Reeves describes how the law of gravity interacts with a growing plant. Gravity is used as a cue in the plant’s biology, but it doesn’t power the plant’s ability to grow.
Dig Deeper
- Read the full paper by Dr. Miller and his colleagues responding to Dr. Kojonen’s work: On the Relationship Between Evolution and Design
This is part of an ongoing series of interviews responding to Dr. Kojonen’s proposal. Listen to more episodes below:
- Listen to Dr. Stephen Dilley explain the philosophical and scientific problems with Dr. Kojonen’s model: Part 1 and Part 2
- Listen to Brian Miller discussing the limits of protein evolution in his interview with Casey.