Monton, Bradley (2006) Is Intelligent Design Science? Dissecting the Dover Decision. [Preprint]

Microsoft Word (.doc) Methodological_Naturalism_Dover_3.doc Download (75kB)

Abstract

In the case of Kitzmiller et al. v. Dover Area School District, et al., Judge Jones ruled that a pro-intelligent design disclaimer cannot be read to public school students. In his decision, he gave demarcation criteria for what counts as science, ruling that intelligent design fails these criteria. I argue that these criteria are flawed, with most of my focus on the criterion of methodological naturalism. The way to refute intelligent design is not by declaring it unscientific, but by showing that the empirical evidence for design is not there.

---

Export/Citation:

EndNote | BibTeX | Dublin Core | ASCII/Text Citation (Chicago) | HTML Citation | OpenURL

Social Networking:

Share |

---

Item Type:	Preprint
Creators:	Creators Email ORCID Monton, Bradley
Keywords:	intelligent design, creationism, demarcation question, methodological naturalism, non-science, psuedoscience, Robert Pennock, Barbara Forrest, William Dembski
Subjects:	General Issues > Science vs. Pseudoscience General Issues > Science and Religion
Depositing User:	Bradley Monton
Date Deposited:	19 Jan 2006
Last Modified:	07 Oct 2010 15:13
Item ID:	2592
Subjects:	General Issues > Science vs. Pseudoscience General Issues > Science and Religion
Date:	January 2006
URI:	https://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/id/eprint/2592

Available Versions of this Item

• Is Intelligent Design Science? Dissecting the Dover Decision. (deposited 04 Jan 2006)
  • Is Intelligent Design Science? Dissecting the Dover Decision. (deposited 19 Jan 2006) [Currently Displayed]

Monthly Views for the past 3 years

Monthly Downloads for the past 3 years

Plum Analytics

Actions (login required)

View Item