In the landmark decision of Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, Judge John E. Jones soundly argues that intelligent design (ID) does not represent a scientific theory, but rather a religious argument whose teaching in public schools violates the Establishment Clause in the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. This argument exhibits both logical validity and true premises in its categorization of the theory as non-scientific, thus being truly sound. In essence, the decision states that ID fails in two major areas – (1) it implies, and even arguably requires, the existence of a supernatural entity; and (2) it entails a false dichotomy in the vein of earlier creationist ideas. Jones argues that each of these individual premises precludes
…show more content…
The defendants repeatedly denied the accusation, citing the aforementioned distinction between the “intelligent designer” and an explicit supernatural entity such as God. This line of thinking was called into question by the plaintiffs, who responded by advocating for the use of the Lemon Test. This procedure determines an idea’s relation to the Establishment Clause by examining whether its primary purpose or effect is the endorsement of religion. While the primary effect of an educational policy is difficult to determine, the purpose could be deduced by examining the wording of the ID policy in the context of its proponent’s discussions and communications. As physical evidence began to surface in the form of the Discovery Institute’s early drafts of ID materials (which explicitly mention “the creator”), the transcripts and communications from the school board meetings, and testimonies from numerous Dover science teachers, the court soon concluded that the “intelligent designed” was no other than the Christian God. Thus, the mere implication of a supernatural entity, coupled with the evidence linking ID to earlier attempts to institute creationism, would be enough to warrant unconstitutional status under the Establishment …show more content…
Advocates of design then postulate that evolution can account for small, gradual adaptations which increase the fitness of an organism, such as a gradual change in fur color, but not for the sudden appearance of such complex structures as the vertebrate eye, which would entail an instantaneous development of intricate biochemical pathways and structures which simply cannot occur under the mechanisms of natural selection and random mutations described in evolutionary theory. Therefore, they conclude, only the involvement of an intelligent designer can account for this
The defendants repeatedly denied the accusation, citing the aforementioned distinction between the “intelligent designer” and an explicit supernatural entity such as God. This line of thinking was called into question by the plaintiffs, who responded by advocating for the use of the Lemon Test. This procedure determines an idea’s relation to the Establishment Clause by examining whether its primary purpose or effect is the endorsement of religion. While the primary effect of an educational policy is difficult to determine, the purpose could be deduced by examining the wording of the ID policy in the context of its proponent’s discussions and communications. As physical evidence began to surface in the form of the Discovery Institute’s early drafts of ID materials (which explicitly mention “the creator”), the transcripts and communications from the school board meetings, and testimonies from numerous Dover science teachers, the court soon concluded that the “intelligent designed” was no other than the Christian God. Thus, the mere implication of a supernatural entity, coupled with the evidence linking ID to earlier attempts to institute creationism, would be enough to warrant unconstitutional status under the Establishment …show more content…
Advocates of design then postulate that evolution can account for small, gradual adaptations which increase the fitness of an organism, such as a gradual change in fur color, but not for the sudden appearance of such complex structures as the vertebrate eye, which would entail an instantaneous development of intricate biochemical pathways and structures which simply cannot occur under the mechanisms of natural selection and random mutations described in evolutionary theory. Therefore, they conclude, only the involvement of an intelligent designer can account for this