NationStates Jolt Archive

Many people have been using the terms Creationism and Intellegent design interchangably here recently. But I think there is an important diffrence between the two that people need to understand.

Creationisim: The belief that God created the world, supported by scientific evidence of the origins of the world interpreted diffrently. For example, the arguement that the Cambrian Srata disproves evolution as there are no forms before it of anything near the complexity is a Creationist point of view. Other points of view such as the flaws in the reptile-bird evolution system are creationist views

Intellegent design: The idea that life is of itself far too complex to have simpley come into existance on its own. This is supported by the fact that Abiogenesis is not scientific and has not been proven to be true. They believe that life can only ever come from life and thus something must have created the first life. Their case is strengthened by the fact that there is no currently observable natural force which can be said to be able to arrange molicules in the kind of complex, ordered fashion that is seen in the single celled life form.

I thought people should be aware of the diffrences between the two. In simple terms, creationism points out the flaws in evolution of itself, as a biological system. Intellegent design points out the flaws with the origin of life being unguided. One is part of the biological sciences, the other is philosophy.

Yeah, it's technically possible to be an atheistic believer in ID.. considering the fact that a majority believe in some type of Creator (or, perhaps, supernatural event, say), I don't see why there can't be a mention of this in class.. Even if it were demonstrably false and unscientific, a mention is in order. If I were learning a theory (in any subject) that the general public was sour on, I'd at least like to know it. Kids do know, of course, but it won't kill them to hear it twice, if it'll shut everyone up. :)

I view ID as creationism without saying "God" or "aliens."

So, to have them being interchangeable, makes sense to me, as there are all different levels of creationism, some of which are essentially ID with the word "God" in them.

<snip>
One is part of the biological sciences, the other is philosophy.

Biological Sciences? Which one is scientific?

Since both creationism and ID have no hypothesis that can be proven or disproven and there is apparently no positive evidence to support either, neither is in the realm of science and both are metaphysics.

I think the difference can be much more easily stated.

Creationism attempts to explain how the world was created.

Intelligent Design doesnt attempt to explain how the Earth was created, it only attempts to point out that it was.

Being a Christian myself, I am well aware that creationism and intelligent design are supported by the same people. I can't name one intelligent design supporter that isn't a Christian. Intelligent design is a sort of a watered down creationism. It's broader then creationism and allows for some non-genesis based beliefs. But what is really happening is that these people know that they can't get away with teaching Genesis as the origin of man, so they get as close as they think they can get away with.

The intelligent design people are advocating it as an alternative to evolution not abiogenesis. Evolution does not claim to know how life came into being, only that once life was there it adapted to its environment through natural selection. According to the form of intelligent design being advocated to be taught in schools I cannot both believe in evolution and intelligent design. If inteligent design were just refering to abriogenesis then I could believe in both.

I do understand what you are saying. I think "intelligent design" is a bad name for the theory they are advocating, since what they are advocating is a little more then an intelligent designer. They advocate an intelligent designer who creates each species one by one through a non-evolutionary process.

Neither intelligent design or creationism are scieintific. Both are interesting and worthwhile to learn in a world religions or philosophy class.

Since both creationism and ID have no hypothesis that can be proven or disproven and there is apparently no positive evidence to support either, neither is in the realm of science and both are metaphysics.
Good point.
Evolution is yet to recieve a truly scientific alternative as none of the others are scientific principles, but opinions/beliefs which can not be scientifically proven.
Nowhere in evolution does it say God does not exist. and Pope John Paul the Second said something along the lines of "The bible is not a brief history of time but how to get into heaven"
Having said that if ID gets into schools, then the following hypothesis should be allowed into the school system
http://www.venganza.org/

Their case is strengthened by the fact that there is no currently observable natural force which can be said to be able to arrange molicules in the kind of complex, ordered fashion that is seen in the single celled life form.

except for thermodynamics, which tells us that these complex arrangements are actually favored as long as you have the right conditions. but i guess that's inconvenient.

the difference between creationism and id is that one is stupid and wrong, and the other is stupid and wrong but thinks itself to be a clever way around the u.s. constitution. of course, it's wrong there too.

Many people have been using the terms Creationism and Intellegent design interchangably here recently. But I think there is an important diffrence between the two that people need to understand.

Creationisim: The belief that God created the world, supported by scientific evidence of the origins of the world interpreted diffrently. For example, the arguement that the Cambrian Srata disproves evolution as there are no forms before it of anything near the complexity is a Creationist point of view. Other points of view such as the flaws in the reptile-bird evolution system are creationist views

Intellegent design: The idea that life is of itself far too complex to have simpley come into existance on its own. This is supported by the fact that Abiogenesis is not scientific and has not been proven to be true. They believe that life can only ever come from life and thus something must have created the first life. Their case is strengthened by the fact that there is no currently observable natural force which can be said to be able to arrange molicules in the kind of complex, ordered fashion that is seen in the single celled life form.

I thought people should be aware of the diffrences between the two. In simple terms, creationism points out the flaws in evolution of itself, as a biological system. Intellegent design points out the flaws with the origin of life being unguided. One is part of the biological sciences, the other is philosophy.


All good and fine to make up your own deffinition

But the dictionary differes in opinion
cre·a·tion·ism Audio pronunciation of "creationism" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (kr-sh-nzm)
n.

Belief in the literal interpretation of the account of the creation of the universe and of all living things related in the Bible.

and webster just for good luck
Main Entry: cre·a·tion·ism
Pronunciation: -sh&-"ni-z&m
Function: noun
: a doctrine or theory holding that matter, the various forms of life, and the world were created by God out of nothing and usually in the way described in Genesis -- compare EVOLUTION