What is the difference between design theory of evolution and intelligent design?

I know that intelligent design is the theological aspect of evolution, but that there is also another theory called "design theory." How does this theory work without using God as an explanation?





Thank you!!!

What is the difference between design theory of evolution and intelligent design?
Design theory is just another name for Intelligent Design.





Intelligent Design is not so much a 'theory', as a set of questions posed to evolution. I.e. it questions whether Darwininan theory of evolution by natural selection is sufficient to explain various features we find in biology ... but it doesn't actually offer much in the way of an alternative explanation of these features.





In fairness, these are often very good questions. Questions about complexity, information, the emergence of hierarchy, etc.





But:





1. A set of questions is not a theory. A theory needs to *explain* something ... describe it in terms of something simpler. Asking questions to dispute evolution doesn't offer an alternative explanation. Saying simply "the Designer designed it" isn't not only an empty tautology. It replaces the thing to be explained (a flagellum, an eye, whatever) with something infinitely *more* complex (an intelligence with no known origin, mechanism for action, energy source, or *motive*). That is precisely the opposite of what an explanation does.





2. These questions have answers fully compatible with evolution theory. However, these answers need some grounding in areas like complexity theory, information theory, emergence, informatics, biochemistry, thermodynamics, etc.





I should also point out that evolution and Intelligent Design are not necessarily in opposition. Michael Behe, one of the main proponents of Intelligent Design, wholly admits to the concept of an old earth, and to the idea of *common descent* ... which are both central tenets of evolution theory. So he does not disagree with evolution ... he just disagrees that Darwinian theory of natural selection is enough to *explain* that evolution. He has not convinced many scientists of this ... but at least it's worth noting that he is not rejecting evolution altogether.





However, Intelligent Design, as it is being promoted by Creationists trying to get ID taught in schools ... is being presented in direct *opposition* to evolution ... as an 'alternative', or even a *replacement* for evolution theory.





This is the height of cynicism that the Creationists and Intelligent Design advocates like Behe have joined forces.





Basically, unable to get ID accepted by scientists, they have turned instead to trying to present it to 10th graders! In short ... unable to convince scientists, they are willing to settle for confusing children that evolution is 'controversial' in scientific circles ... which it most certainly is NOT.
Reply:Design theory is just the Discovery Institute's attempt to repackage ID. They are the same thing.
Reply:Sounds like the same thing to me. The use of the word "design" gives it away. When the notion of "intelligent design" sort of fell flat, the obvious solution is to take the words "theory of evolution", add the word "design" to it, then try to sell the same old "intelligent design" as "design theory of evolution".





Communists used to do the same thing. It used to be that every communist country was either "North" or "East" as in North Korea, East Germany, North Vietnam. You NEVER had a country named "West" something that was communist. The next stage was for the communist countries to call themselves "Democratic", which they were anything but.. So you got "Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea", "Democratic Republic of East Germany", "Peoples Republic of China" to the point where any country with the words "Democratic" or Peoples" in it was guaranteed communist and anything but democratic.





So here anything you see with the name "design" in it is the same thing.