Biology & Philosophy

, Volume 23, Issue 4, pp 545–553 | Cite as

Intelligent design and mathematical statistics: a troubled alliance

Article

Abstract

The explanatory filter is a proposed method to detect design in nature with the aim of refuting Darwinian evolution. The explanatory filter borrows its logical structure from the theory of statistical hypothesis testing but we argue that, when viewed within this context, the filter runs into serious trouble in any interesting biological application. Although the explanatory filter has been extensively criticized from many angles, we present the first rigorous criticism based on the theory of mathematical statistics.

Keywords

Intelligent design Evolution Mathematical statistics Hypothesis testing 

References

  1. Behe M (1996) Darwin’s black box. Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Dembski WA (1998) The design inference: eliminating chance through small probabilities. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  3. Dembski WA (2002) No free lunch: why specified complexity cannot be purchased without intelligence. Roman & Littlefield, Lanham, MAGoogle Scholar
  4. Elsberry W, Shallit J (2003) Information theory, evolutionary computation, and Dembski’s complex specified information. Submitted for print; also available at http://www.talkreason.org/articles/eandsdembski.pdf
  5. Elsberry W, Shallit J (2004) Playing games with probability: Dembski’s complex specified information, In: Young M, Edis T (eds) Why intelligent design fails: a scientific critique of the new creationism. Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, pp 121–138Google Scholar
  6. Fitelson B, Stephens C, Sober E (1999) How not to detect design—a review of William Dembski’s the design inference. Philos Sci 66:472–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Häggström O (2007) Intelligent design and the NFL theorems. Biol Philos 22:217–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Miller K (2000) Finding Darwin’s god: a scientist’s search for common ground between God and evolution. Harper Perennial, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Miller K (2004) The flagellum unspun: the collapse of irreducible complexity, In: Dembski WA, Ruse M (eds) Debating design: from Darwin to DNA. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  10. Nowak M (2005) Time magazine, August 7, 2005Google Scholar
  11. Perakh M (2003) Unintelligent design. Prometheus Books, New York, 459 ppGoogle Scholar
  12. Perakh M(2005) The dream world of William Dembski’s creationism. Skeptic 11(4)Google Scholar
  13. Shallit J (2002) Book review: no free lunch. BioSystems 66:93–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Sober E (2002) Intelligent design and probability reasoning. Int J Philos Relig 52:65–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Sober E (2004) The design argument. In: Mann W (eds) The blackwell guide to philosophy of religion, Blackwell, Oxford, pp 117–147Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1. Mathematics DepartmentTrinity UniversitySan AntonioUSA

Personalised recommendations