Jay Richards

On this episode of ID the Future, Anika Smith interviews CSC Research Director Jay Richards about when it’s wise to doubt a “scientific consensus.” With growing skepticism on issues where the public is told that scientific consensus exists — most notably Darwinian evolution, but also climate change. How can we tell if the consensus is based on social pressure or on scientific evidence? Listen in, and be sure to read Dr. Richards’ article at The American here.

CSC’s Logan Gage interviews senior fellow Jay Richards about how philosophers of science use demarcation criteria to determine what is or isn’t science. One of the most commonly referred to demarcation points is falsifiability. Many scientists see the question of falsifiability as the gold standard in determining whether something is science or not. Richards defines what falsifiability is, why it’s important and answers whether or not intelligent design can be falsified and is therefore scientific. About Jay RichardsJay Wesley Richards has a Ph.D.(honors) in philosophy and theology from Princeton Theological Seminary, where he was a Teaching Fellow. He is presently a Research Fellow and Director of Media at the Acton Institute in Grand Rapids, Michigan. Richards has been published in Read More ›

In this edition of ID The Future, CSC’s Logan Gage interviews Dr. Jay Richards about William Paley, David Hume, and the arguments for intelligent design. Dr. Richards begins with a description of William Paley’s 1802 book Natural Theology, in which the author infers from the natural world that there must be some intelligent force (God) responsible for its design. Richards then addresses David Hume’s critique of analogical arguments like those used by Paley. Dr. Richards closes by differentiating between analogical arguments and arguments for intelligent design.

On this episode of ID The Future we have a short clip of Dr. Jay Richards, discussing the question who designed the designer?

Critics of intelligent design theory often throw this question out thinking to highlight a weakness in ID. Richards shows that the theory’s inability to identify the designer is not a weakness, but a strength. ID does not identify the designer is because ID limits its claims to those which can be established by empirical evidence. As CSC Senior Fellow Dr. Michael Behe puts it: ” [A] scientific argument for design in biology does not reach that far. Thus while I argue for design, the question of the identity of the designer is left open.”

Even as Darwinists at SMU are moving to stifle an intelligent design conference on their campus, this episode of ID The Future features a short clip of an address to the National Press Club by Dr. Jay Richards about academic freedom. As Richards explains, Darwinists are actively working to censor scientist and scholars advocating intelligent design, and are trying to curb their right to freely discuss even just scientific criticisms of Darwinian evolution. There is a growing trend of dogmatic Darwinists trying to intimidate people who are in some way associated with researching intelligent design into being quiet, rather than engaging in a civil debate about the scientific merits of their arguments.

On this episode of ID The Future we have a short clip about the The Privileged Planet. In the book, authors Guillermo Gonzalez and Jay W. Richards suggest Earth was designed for scientific discovery. They introduce a new idea, more than just that the earth is just a rarity in the universe they argue that Earth is ideal for scientific observation. Specifically they critique the Copernican principle, which holds that Earth is not special in its ability to support life. In this clip, Jay Richards lays out the problems with the Copernican principle.