demarcation problem

University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania in North Oakland

^{Paul Nelson
July 27, 2022}

Design in a Naturalistic Culture

_{Paul Nelson
July 27, 2022}

^{Discovery Institute
July 5, 2013
Intelligent Design}

Stephen C. Meyer: Is intelligent design science? Signature in the Cell and Darwin’s Doubt

_{Discovery Institute
July 5, 2013
Intelligent Design}

Stephen Meyer is the author of The New York Times best selling book Darwin’s Doubt: The Explosive Origin of Animal Life and the case for Intelligent Design (HarperOne, 2013). For more information on the book and to order your copy visit http://www.darwinsdoubt.com

^{Stephen C. Meyer
February 15, 2011
Intelligent Design}

Sauce for the Goose

_{Stephen C. Meyer
February 15, 2011
Intelligent Design}

Judge Jones, in his Kitzmiller v. Dover opinion expressed an entrenched view common not only among members of the media and scientific establishment. But why isn’t the theory of intelligent design scientific? On what basis do critics of the theory make that claim? And is it justified? Read More ›

^{David K. DeWolf, John G. West, Casey Luskin and Jonathan Witt
March 7, 2006
Academic Freedom, Intelligent Design}

Traipsing Into Evolution

_{David K. DeWolf, John G. West, Casey Luskin and Jonathan Witt
March 7, 2006
Academic Freedom, Intelligent Design}

Traipsing into Evolution is a critique of federal Judge John E. Jones's decision in the Kitzmiller v. Dover case, the first trial concerning the constitutionality of teaching intelligent design in public schools. Read More ›

^{Stephen C. Meyer
November 13, 2005
Intelligent Design}

The Scientific Status of Intelligent Design

_{Stephen C. Meyer
November 13, 2005
Intelligent Design}

Underlying Darwin's repudiation of creationist legitimacy lay an entirely different conception of science than had prevailed among earlier naturalists. Darwin's attacks on his creationist and idealist opponents in part expressed and in part established an emerging positivistic "episteme" in which the mere mention of unverifiable "acts of Divine will" or "the plan of creation" would increasingly serve to disqualify theories from consideration as science qua science. Read More ›

Single red ball standing out from the crowd of white spheres and crossing line, leadership, standing out or bravery concept over blue background

^{William A. Dembski
March 31, 2005
Intelligent Design}

Is Intelligent Causation Perfectly Natural?

_{William A. Dembski
March 31, 2005
Intelligent Design}

Critics of intelligent design argue that intelligent design is not a scientific theory. They do so, however, not by confronting the evidence and logic by which design theorists argue for their conclusions. Rather, they do so by definitional fiat. Read More ›

^{Stephen C. Meyer
October 3, 2003
Intelligent Design}

Qualified Agreement

_{Stephen C. Meyer
October 3, 2003
Intelligent Design}

^{Stephen C. Meyer
January 1, 2000
Intelligent Design}

The Demarcation of Science and Religion

_{Stephen C. Meyer
January 1, 2000
Intelligent Design}

What is science? What is religion? How do the two intersect? Historians of science address these questions by analyzing how the scientific and religious beliefs of particular scientists or cultures have interacted at specific times. Philosophers of science and religion, however, have sought to characterize the relationship between them in more general terms. Their endeavor has required defining science and religion in order to distinguish or "demarcate" them from each other by clear and objective criteria. During modern times, theologians and philosophers of science have attempted to make categorical demarcations between science and religion on various definitional grounds. Read More ›

Microphone in focus against blurred people at roundtable event

^{Jonathan Wells
November 22, 1999
Intelligent Design}

All Forms of Science Designed for Discussion

_{Jonathan Wells
November 22, 1999
Intelligent Design}

Since Darwin's theory has as many religious implications as the theory of intelligent design, it is not possible to demarcate the two on the grounds that one is science and the other is religion. Read More ›

^{Paul Nelson
December 1, 1993
Intelligent Design}

Thinking About the Theory of Design

_{Paul Nelson
December 1, 1993
Intelligent Design}

Introduction: Why Return to a Disreputable Business? Present theological discussions . . . ignore natural theology, and for contemporary linguistic philosophers the Argument from Design possesses no validity whatsoever and is logically and morally indefensible, although it may serve to heighten religious emotions. Meyrick H. Carre“Physicotheology,” The Encyclopedia of Philosophy One wonders what religious emotions the argument from design is Read More ›