INTELLIGENT DESIGN EVIDENCE
Special Evidence: Irreducible Complexity
Special Evidence: Irreducible Complexity
|
Darwin himself provided the scientific basis for finding irreducible complexity as a
way to test his theory when he stated in his book On the Origin of Species:
evolution, through a concept he calls irreducible complexity. As explained by the
International Society for Complexity, Information and Design (ISCID) in their
Encyclopedia of Science and Philosophy:[2]
Michael Behe's Original Definition: A single system composed of several well-
matched, interacting parts that contribute to the basic function of the system,
wherein the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease
functioning. (Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution, p. 39)
William Dembski's Enhanced Definition: A system performing a given basic
function is irreducibly complex if it includes a set of well-matched, mutually
interacting, nonarbitrarily individuated parts such that each part in the set is
indispensable to maintaining the system's basic, and therefore original, function.
The set of these indispensable parts is known as the irreducible core of the
system. (Dembski, No Free Lunch: Why Specified Complexity Cannot be
Purchased Without Intelligence,p. 285)
Michael Behe's "Evolutionary" Definition: An irreducibly complex evolutionary
pathway is one that contains one or more unselected steps (that is, one or more
necessary-but-unselected mutations). The degree of irreducible complexity is the
number of unselected steps in the pathway.
Behe first introduced the concept of irreducible complexity in his book Darwin's
Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution. He has since expanded on the
concept in his book The Edge of Evolution: The Search for the Limits of Darwinism.
In Edge of Evolution he extends his analysis to define what evolution is capable of
doing and what is beyond its scope.
In Darwin's Black Box Behe used the illustration of a mousetrap as an example of
an irreducibly complex system. A simple mousetrap includes: (1) a flat wooden
platform to act as a base; (2) a metal hammer, which does the actual job of
crushing the little mouse; (3) a wire spring with extended ends to press against the
platform and the hammer when the trap is charged; (4) a sensitive catch which
releases when slight pressure is applied; and (5) a metal bar which holds the
hammer back when the trap is charged and connects to the catch. There are also
assorted staples and screws to hold the system together.
If any one of the components of the mousetrap (the base, hammer, spring, catch, or
holding bar) is removed, then the trap does not function. In other words, the simple
little mousetrap has no ability to trap a mouse until several separate parts are all
assembled, i.e., all the parts arrive in functional order and are assembled at the
same time. Because the mousetrap is necessarily composed of several parts, it is
irreducibly complex. Thus, irreducibly complex systems exist.
Behe then asks: Now, are any biochemical systems irreducibly complex? Yes, it
turns out that many are. In many biological structures proteins are simply
components of larger molecular machines. Like the picture tube, wires, metal bolts
and screws that comprise a television set, many proteins are part of structures that
only function when virtually all of the components have been assembled. A good
example of this is a cilium. The components of cilia are single molecules. This
means that there are no more black boxes to invoke; the complexity of the cilium is
final, fundamental. And just as scientists, when they began to learn the
complexities of the cell, realized how silly it was to think that life arose
spontaneously in a single step or a few steps from ocean mud, so too we now
realize that the complex cilium can not be reached in a single step or a few steps.
But since the complexity of the cilium is irreducible, then it can not have functional
precursors. Since the irreducibly complex cilium can not have functional precursors
it can not be produced by natural selection, which requires a continuum of function
to work. Natural selection is powerless when there is no function to select. We can
go further and say that, if the cilium can not be produced by natural selection, then
the cilium was designed.
Another example is the bacterial flagellum. As quoted at Access Research Network
(www.arn.org), Behe explains:
The bacterial flagellum is just one of virually innumerable biological structures, that,
once understood in detail, have no naturalistic causal explanation. Many
evolutionists have attempted to deny Behe's contention that the flagellum is
irreducibly complex, but every attempt fails to show how the flagellum actually could
have been formed by Darwinian gradualism. Rather, all denials by evolutionists of
irreducible complexity rely on non-confirmable, non-falsifiable, non-experimental
assumptions to justify belief in unguided processes to produce such structures.
For more on irreducible complexity, go to www.discovery.org/a/1831, or to www.
ideacenter.org/contentmgr/showdetails.php/id/1142, or to www.darwinismrefuted.
com/irreducible_complexity_01.html.
way to test his theory when he stated in his book On the Origin of Species:
- If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not
possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications,
my theory would absolutely break down. (Darwin, Charles (1872) Origin of
Species 6th ed (1988), p.151, New York University Press, New York)
evolution, through a concept he calls irreducible complexity. As explained by the
International Society for Complexity, Information and Design (ISCID) in their
Encyclopedia of Science and Philosophy:[2]
Michael Behe's Original Definition: A single system composed of several well-
matched, interacting parts that contribute to the basic function of the system,
wherein the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease
functioning. (Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution, p. 39)
William Dembski's Enhanced Definition: A system performing a given basic
function is irreducibly complex if it includes a set of well-matched, mutually
interacting, nonarbitrarily individuated parts such that each part in the set is
indispensable to maintaining the system's basic, and therefore original, function.
The set of these indispensable parts is known as the irreducible core of the
system. (Dembski, No Free Lunch: Why Specified Complexity Cannot be
Purchased Without Intelligence,p. 285)
Michael Behe's "Evolutionary" Definition: An irreducibly complex evolutionary
pathway is one that contains one or more unselected steps (that is, one or more
necessary-but-unselected mutations). The degree of irreducible complexity is the
number of unselected steps in the pathway.
Behe first introduced the concept of irreducible complexity in his book Darwin's
Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution. He has since expanded on the
concept in his book The Edge of Evolution: The Search for the Limits of Darwinism.
In Edge of Evolution he extends his analysis to define what evolution is capable of
doing and what is beyond its scope.
In Darwin's Black Box Behe used the illustration of a mousetrap as an example of
an irreducibly complex system. A simple mousetrap includes: (1) a flat wooden
platform to act as a base; (2) a metal hammer, which does the actual job of
crushing the little mouse; (3) a wire spring with extended ends to press against the
platform and the hammer when the trap is charged; (4) a sensitive catch which
releases when slight pressure is applied; and (5) a metal bar which holds the
hammer back when the trap is charged and connects to the catch. There are also
assorted staples and screws to hold the system together.
If any one of the components of the mousetrap (the base, hammer, spring, catch, or
holding bar) is removed, then the trap does not function. In other words, the simple
little mousetrap has no ability to trap a mouse until several separate parts are all
assembled, i.e., all the parts arrive in functional order and are assembled at the
same time. Because the mousetrap is necessarily composed of several parts, it is
irreducibly complex. Thus, irreducibly complex systems exist.
Behe then asks: Now, are any biochemical systems irreducibly complex? Yes, it
turns out that many are. In many biological structures proteins are simply
components of larger molecular machines. Like the picture tube, wires, metal bolts
and screws that comprise a television set, many proteins are part of structures that
only function when virtually all of the components have been assembled. A good
example of this is a cilium. The components of cilia are single molecules. This
means that there are no more black boxes to invoke; the complexity of the cilium is
final, fundamental. And just as scientists, when they began to learn the
complexities of the cell, realized how silly it was to think that life arose
spontaneously in a single step or a few steps from ocean mud, so too we now
realize that the complex cilium can not be reached in a single step or a few steps.
But since the complexity of the cilium is irreducible, then it can not have functional
precursors. Since the irreducibly complex cilium can not have functional precursors
it can not be produced by natural selection, which requires a continuum of function
to work. Natural selection is powerless when there is no function to select. We can
go further and say that, if the cilium can not be produced by natural selection, then
the cilium was designed.
Another example is the bacterial flagellum. As quoted at Access Research Network
(www.arn.org), Behe explains:
- Because the bacterial flagellum is necessarily composed of at least three
parts -- a paddle,a rotor, and a motor -- it is irreducibly complex. Gradual
evolution of the flagellum, like the cilium, therefore faces mammoth hurdles.
The bacterial flagellum is just one of virually innumerable biological structures, that,
once understood in detail, have no naturalistic causal explanation. Many
evolutionists have attempted to deny Behe's contention that the flagellum is
irreducibly complex, but every attempt fails to show how the flagellum actually could
have been formed by Darwinian gradualism. Rather, all denials by evolutionists of
irreducible complexity rely on non-confirmable, non-falsifiable, non-experimental
assumptions to justify belief in unguided processes to produce such structures.
For more on irreducible complexity, go to www.discovery.org/a/1831, or to www.
ideacenter.org/contentmgr/showdetails.php/id/1142, or to www.darwinismrefuted.
com/irreducible_complexity_01.html.
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |