ID and Naturalism

A comment on a earlier post caused me to think about the relationship of ID (intelligent design) and naturalism. Many of those who expouse ID say that if it is presented in a science classroom it should not be presented as a philosophical or a theological enterprise. Instead, it should be promoted as a scientific research program. AS long as this is followed, ID is compatible with naturalism.

This sounds shocking because many of the backers behind ID do not believe in naturalism and do not believe that it should constrain science. Nevertheless, as long as ID is a scientific enterprise, it does not conflict with naturalism. As a scientific enterprise, ID is the investigation of intelligently designed things. As a scientific enterprise, ID does not entertain thoughts about the nature or identity of the designer. So there is no scientific reason to suppose that the designer is not embodied. Perhaps the designer is an alien. Perhaps this alien created our universe. ID as a scientific enterprise cannot deny this.

At this point I can imagine an objection: But no ID theorist really believes that! True, but irrelevant. There are people who take the scientific evidence for a beginning of the universe to mean that God created it. Not everyone is convinced by this sort of argument. However, this form of argument is exactly the same as the design argument from evidence inside ID theory. The cosmological (kalam) argument begins with a scientific or metaphysical data of a beginning to the universe and deduces that there must be a first cause. The design argument begins with the evidence of ID and argues that there must be an unembodied designer. The evidence of ID and a beginning to the universe are equally consistent with naturalism in a scientific context. It is only when we move outside that narrow context that these facts may no longer be consistent with naturalism.

So although the scientific project of ID is consistent with anti-naturalism, it is also consistent with naturalism. In fact, there are many metaphysical theories of the universe and causation that it is compatible with. There is a sense in which ID is not consistent with naturalism, but that sense is not a scientific sense. It is the sense of seeking out the best explanation for intelligently designed features of our world.