THE LIMITS OF SCIENCE
[Intelligent Design (ID) is compatible with Christian theology, but it is not the only such approach to evolution that is. A philosopher clarifies his views.
The interview with Santiago Collado - Is Intelligent Design Really Science?, cfr. #287- provoked a lot of comment from our readers. Many wondered how a professed Christian could dismiss Intelligent Design as unscientific and inconsistent with a traditional Christian approach to creation.
Dr. Santiago Collado is reseaching the philosophical underpinnings of the Intelligent Design movement. MercatorNet asked him to expand upon his ideas.]
#289 Varios Categoria-Varios: Etica y Antropologia
by Michael Cook
MercatorNet: How is it possible to doubt whether Intelligent Design is compatible with Christian theology?
Collado: Let me clarify things a bit. Intelligent Design is compatible with Christian theology. But it is certainly not the only explanation of evolutionary change which is compatible with Christian theology. And I do have some serious reservations. My misgivings hinge on the fact that ID is not a theory which will allow us to reach an understanding of the Christian God through science. In fact, the main ID theorists never tire of repeating that they are not necessarily speaking of God when they propose the existence of intelligent design.
I think that science can help us to know God better, just as our ordinary knowledge of the world around us helps us. Contemplating nature leads us to God the creator. But it seems clear to me that the God which we detect by using the theory of intelligent design – if we assume that the intelligence which they defend for the designer of living beings is actually God and not an alien intelligence, for instance – would be a very poor god when we compare him to the God whom we know through theology and philosophy.
Let me repeat: ID does not deny the existence of the Christian God. But if life originated as ID contends, and that origin is to be called god, I feel that he would be a very poor god and that eventually we would be able to do without him in our explanations of the existence of life.