Darwin’s Doubt by Stephen Meyer is a landmark in the public discussion of intelligent design. For the first time in history, a book presenting the scientific evidence for intelligent design in biology has landed on the New York Times bestseller list. As a result, the critics of intelligent design are even crankier and angrier than usual (if that’s possible!); and they are doing their best to suppress interest in the book by waging a campaign of character assassination and disinformation. – See more at: http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/08/promote_free_sp075761.html#sthash.4JW18i5q.dpuf
I am not a knee-jerk opponent of ID, and find the design inference of interest. The problem is that a design inference is only that: it tells us no more about the issue in question.
I have never used the ‘design inference’ for WHEE material, but the suspicion of design lurks, BUT… One problem is the Axial Age suggests a ‘design inference’, shall we say, but what is the design? That is, what exactly is the phenomenon in question? We can see a design in the emergence of two religions, one theistic, one atheistic, and a kind of proto-secularism, at the same time. Further, the design argument seems to work in general but seems to fail when you try to apply it to the case of Israel: the design argument using the divinity Jehovah is so crudely idiotic as to vitiate design arguments. And yet the context in which this occurs, next to a whole spectrum of spectacular parallel effects is hard to understand as random emergentism. We are stuck with the conclusion that ‘design arguments’ are deeper than standard ‘theism’ arguments!
Warning enough to be wary of design arguments (which are never used in WHEE)