Free «Darwins Reading English» Essay Paper

Question Three (Page 716)

“Teleology” is the use of design or purpose as way of explaining the natural phenomena.

Believers in cosmic teleology do not believe in intelligent designer, since they believe that everything come into being through a super natural being, (based on religious tradition) while intelligent designers explains on biological system that everything was designed but do not rely on religion. The ideas in the two are related since they both explain that all natural phenomena had designers from which they acquire novelty.

Question Seven (Page 716)

“Irreducible complexity” is an argument by proponents of intelligent designer that certain biological systems are too complex to have evolved from simple or less complete predecessors. Dembski could reply to critics that due to complexity of phenomena it is not possible for repeatable by chance. And that system is not only specified by their independent functional requirements but also exhibit a high degree of complexity.

 

Type of service

Type of assignment

Title of your paper *

Academic level

Pages

Timeframe

Spacing

Currency

  Order now

Question Eight (Page 716)

Creation is the source of being in the world that is the origin of every material that the architect uses in fashioning or designing. And intelligent design is the science that studies signs of intelligence; it is about bringing together and arranging of the pre-existing materials that point to designing or fashioning by the architect.

Question Two (Page 719)

There are claims that support intelligent design according to Behe which include; the effect of design in nature can be recognized, physical marks of design are visible in aspects of biology, there is no good explanation for the foundation of life that does not involves intelligence and that in the absence of any convincing non-design explanation, we are justified in thinking that real intelligent design was involve in life. The most grounded claims are; that the effect of design in nature can be recognized, for example the formation of mountains or lakes are witnessed as the design of nature. Volcanic eruption leads to formation of lakes and the lava cooling and settling after eruption leads to formation of these features which can be witnessed. Another grounded claim is that the physical marks of design are visible in aspects of biology; here it explains that what the biologist sees evolved from designer and also that there is no good explanation without designer since all phenomena had novelty. The least grounded claim is that in the absence of non-designer explanation, we are justified that real intelligent was involve in life, since life could also come to effects of nature.

Question Five (Page 719)

The argument for intelligent design using the duck analogy is convincing since once an essential of an organism exhibits specified complexity any design attributable to that constituent carries over to the organism as a whole.

Question Four (Page 728)

From the argument of whether the whales is an exception to the evolution of species by natural selection brings out clarity of the intelligent designer. If through evolution from species whale’s traces should be found on the earth surface but it’s impossible since the novelty of whale was as a result of intelligent design where they were design to the environment and not the theory of evolution.

Question Seven (Page 728)

Creationist is the intelligent designer where novelties of all phenomena are traced to have its roots. It is true that only the creationists support the theory of intelligent design since they also explain that behind any phenomena there has been a designer, that is existing phenomena come to existence due to the intelligence point of the an architect. The intelligent design theorist William A.Dembski will agree with the creationist because he also based his idea of the novelty of phenomena on the intelligence design point.

Stay Connected

Live Chat Order now

Question Six (Page 732)

Yes it’s true that one can be both scientific and religious, but one must tuck both spheres into their separate beds at night, this is because scientists will explain nature and finally accept that there is a natural being behind their explanation which in Christianity is believed to be God. Evolution contradicts creation as in religion to some point hence as a scientist and a religious one should be able to balance the concepts of both the science and religion towards existence.

Question Two (Page 734)

Evolution is theory and not a fact. It’s true because all the evolution theories only a tempts by way of chance that if a certain phenomena existed and had the same characteristic with another then it had evolved from it, which might not be the case. So evolution theory only predicts but does not have factual reasons for existence of phenomena hence it’s a theory not fact.