Essay on Judge Jones decision
In this essay I will be examining Judge Jones’ decision with regard to the demarcation problem as it relates to Intelligent Design. I will do this by examining his conclusion, then trying to see the method of how he got to that conclusion by looking at his premises, when I have reconstructed the argument that he is making, I will then evaluate the strength of the premises and validity of the argument to see whether or not he should have reached that conclusion with the evidence he had at hand.
The conclusion that Judge Jones reaches in relation to the demarcation problem with regard to Intelligent Design theory is that ID theory should not be considered science, so therefore should not be taught or given consideration …show more content…
Judge Jones says (p.71) that when putting irreducible complexity forth ID theorist provide a false choice of if irreducible complexity is true that means that Darwinian evolution must be false, so ID must be true. Irreducible complexity is an idea which Judge Jones says on the counsel on his scientific experts for the trial has been refuted and an evolutionary explanation has been provided for how certain parts evolved, which states that the part would have originally evolved with a different function, such as insect wings originally evolved to regulate temperature until they grew big enough to facilitate …show more content…
The addition of a supernatural being which is by definition not considered natural to any theory would mean that the parts of the scientific theory that the supernatural being is meant to explain cannot be empirically tested, leaving gaps in the understanding and theory, therefore under this definition of science ID theory cannot be tested and cannot be considered
In this essay I will be examining Judge Jones’ decision with regard to the demarcation problem as it relates to Intelligent Design. I will do this by examining his conclusion, then trying to see the method of how he got to that conclusion by looking at his premises, when I have reconstructed the argument that he is making, I will then evaluate the strength of the premises and validity of the argument to see whether or not he should have reached that conclusion with the evidence he had at hand.
The conclusion that Judge Jones reaches in relation to the demarcation problem with regard to Intelligent Design theory is that ID theory should not be considered science, so therefore should not be taught or given consideration …show more content…
Judge Jones says (p.71) that when putting irreducible complexity forth ID theorist provide a false choice of if irreducible complexity is true that means that Darwinian evolution must be false, so ID must be true. Irreducible complexity is an idea which Judge Jones says on the counsel on his scientific experts for the trial has been refuted and an evolutionary explanation has been provided for how certain parts evolved, which states that the part would have originally evolved with a different function, such as insect wings originally evolved to regulate temperature until they grew big enough to facilitate …show more content…
The addition of a supernatural being which is by definition not considered natural to any theory would mean that the parts of the scientific theory that the supernatural being is meant to explain cannot be empirically tested, leaving gaps in the understanding and theory, therefore under this definition of science ID theory cannot be tested and cannot be considered