Pretorius, MarkPretorius, Mark2022-10-042022-10-04https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14194/2657This study endeavors to understand the writings of Ken Miller and Eugenie Scott in terms of their objections to Intelligent Design being involved in the Natural Science Debates on the Origin of Life. These writings include Ken Miller’s books Finding Darwin's God-A Scientist's Search for Common Ground Between God and Evolution and Only a Theory-Evolution and the Battle for America's Soul. These writings also include Eugenie Scott’s books Not in Our Classrooms-Why Intelligent Design is wrong for Our Classrooms and Evolution vs. Creationism -An Introduction.Further, this study identifies the objections these two authors have with Intelligent Design and looks for possible solutions from the Intelligent Design Movement. The idea is that advocates of both sides are quick to judge and slow to listen. This study is not to convince one side or the other, but to simply listen to the objections and possible answers from both sides. In this way a bridge can be made between the two sides and these divergent groups can begin to understand one another.The objections that were raised by Miller and Scott include Miller’s objections to the age of the earth, limitations on evolution’s mechanism of natural selection, family trees in animals, Aristotle’s idea of four distinct kinds of causes and finally design imperfections. This study also brought out ID’s connection with creationism and its contention with mainstream science.ID advocates answer these objections by saying that Intelligent Design (hereafter designated as ID)is not necessarily connected with a literal Genesis or a young-earth position. They do contend that the scientific community and its reliance on naturalism is a stumbling block for the Intelligent Design Movement. The study also explores the nature of a designer and how this affects the acceptance of intelligent design. The study then moves to the proper use of science as expressed in the scientific method and how the concept of a designer could hinder the acceptance of intelligent designThis study endeavors to understand the writings of Ken Miller and Eugenie Scott in terms of their objections to Intelligent Design being involved in the Natural Science Debates on the Origin of Life. These writings include Ken Miller’s books Finding Darwin's God-A Scientist's Search for Common Ground Between God and Evolution and Only a Theory-Evolution and the Battle for America's Soul. These writings also include Eugenie Scott’s books Not in Our Classrooms-Why Intelligent Design is wrong for Our Classrooms and Evolution vs. Creationism -An Introduction.Further, this study identifies the objections these two authors have with Intelligent Design and looks for possible solutions from the Intelligent Design Movement. The idea is that advocates of both sides are quick to judge and slow to listen. This study is not to convince one side or the other, but to simply listen to the objections and possible answers from both sides. In this way a bridge can be made between the two sides and these divergent groups can begin to understand one another.The objections that were raised by Miller and Scott include Miller’s objections to the age of the earth, limitations on evolution’s mechanism of natural selection, family trees in animals, Aristotle’s idea of four distinct kinds of causes and finally design imperfections. This study also brought out ID’s connection with creationism and its contention with mainstream science.ID advocates answer these objections by saying that Intelligent Design (hereafter designated as ID)is not necessarily connected with a literal Genesis or a young-earth position. They do contend that the scientific community and its reliance on naturalism is a stumbling block for the Intelligent Design Movement. The study also explores the nature of a designer and how this affects the acceptance of intelligent design. The study then moves to the proper use of science as expressed in the scientific method and how the concept of a designer could hinder the acceptance of intelligent design125p125pApologeticsThesis