Kompleksiteti i Pareduktueshëm

Kompleksiteti i pareduktueshëm (Irreducible Complexity IC) është një argument nga ana e ithtarëve të Projektimit Inteligjent që thekson se disa sisteme biologjike janë tepër kompleks të ketë qenë të evoluar nga paraardhësit e thjeshta biologjike, nëpërmjet seleksionimit natyror, duke vepruar në serie të mutacioneve të dobishme të krejtësisht natyrore.

Ky argument është në qendër të projektimit inteligjent, dhe është hedhur poshtë nga komuniteti shkencor në përgjithësi, i cili me shumicë dërrmuese i përket projektimin inteligjent si pseudo-shkenca kompleksiteti i pareduktueshëm është njëri prej dy argumentet kryesore të përdorura nga përkrahësit e projektimit inteligjent; dhe tjeri është Kompleksiteti i specifikuar.^[1]

Bibliografia Redakto

Forrest, Barbara (1 maj 2007). Understanding the Intelligent Design Creationist Movement: Its True Nature and Goals. A Position Paper from the Center for Inquiry, Office of Public Policy (PDF). Washington, D.C.: Center for Inquiry, Inc. Arkivuar nga origjinali (PDF) më 19 maj 2011. Marrë më 2007-08-22. {{cite book}}: Mungon ose është bosh parametri |language= (Ndihmë!).
Pseudoscience and Extraordinary Claims of the Paranormal: A Critical Thinker's Toolkit, Jonathan C. Smith, p 307, ISBN 1-4051-8123-0
Shermer, Michael (2002). The Skeptic Encyclopedia of Pseudoscience. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO. fq. 450. ISBN 1-57607-653-9. {{cite book}}: Mungon ose është bosh parametri |language= (Ndihmë!)
Shulman, Seth (2008). Undermining Science. Berkeley: University of California Press. fq. 139. ISBN 0-520-25626-3. {{cite book}}: Mungon ose është bosh parametri |language= (Ndihmë!)
Pigliucci, Massimo (2010). Nonsense on Stilts. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. fq. 177. ISBN 0-226-66786-3. {{cite book}}: Mungon ose është bosh parametri |language= (Ndihmë!)

Referime Redakto

^ "True in this latest creationist variant, advocates of so-called intelligent design ... use more slick, pseudoscientific language. They talk about things like 'irreducible complexity'" —
Shulman, Seth (2006). Undermining science: suppression and distortion in the Bush Administration. Berkeley: University of California Press. fq. 13. ISBN 0-520-24702-7. {{cite book}}: Mungon ose është bosh parametri |language= (Ndihmë!) "for most members of the mainstream scientific community, ID is not a scientific theory, but a creationist pseudoscience."
David Mu (1 maj 2005). "Trojan Horse or Legitimate Science: Deconstructing the Debate over Intelligent Design" (PDF). Harvard Science Review. 19 (1). Arkivuar nga origjinali (PDF) më 24 korrik 2007. Marrë më 7 korrik 2013. {{cite journal}}: Mungon ose është bosh parametri |language= (Ndihmë!)
Perakh M. "Why Intelligent Design Isn't Intelligent — Review of: Unintelligent Design". Cell Biol Educ. 4 (2): 121–2. doi:10.1187/cbe.05-02-0071. PMC 1103713. {{cite journal}}: Mungon ose është bosh parametri |language= (Ndihmë!)
Mark D. Decker. College of Biological Sciences, General Biology Program, University of Minnesota Frequently Asked Questions About the Texas Science Textbook Adoption Controversy Arkivuar 30 shtator 2010 tek Wayback Machine "The Discovery Institute and ID proponents have a number of goals that they hope to achieve using disingenuous and mendacious methods of marketing, publicity, and political persuasion. They do not practice real science because that takes too long, but mainly because this method requires that one have actual evidence and logical reasons for one's conclusions, and the ID proponents just don't have those. If they had such resources, they would use them, and not the disreputable methods they actually use.}}

[1] "True in this latest creationist variant, advocates of so-called intelligent design ... use more slick, pseudoscientific language. They talk about things like 'irreducible complexity'" —
Shulman, Seth (2006). Undermining science: suppression and distortion in the Bush Administration. Berkeley: University of California Press. fq. 13. ISBN 0-520-24702-7. {{cite book}}: Mungon ose është bosh parametri |language= (Ndihmë!) "for most members of the mainstream scientific community, ID is not a scientific theory, but a creationist pseudoscience."
David Mu (1 maj 2005). "Trojan Horse or Legitimate Science: Deconstructing the Debate over Intelligent Design" (PDF). Harvard Science Review. 19 (1). Arkivuar nga origjinali (PDF) më 24 korrik 2007. Marrë më 7 korrik 2013. {{cite journal}}: Mungon ose është bosh parametri |language= (Ndihmë!)
Perakh M. "Why Intelligent Design Isn't Intelligent — Review of: Unintelligent Design". Cell Biol Educ. 4 (2): 121–2. doi:10.1187/cbe.05-02-0071. PMC 1103713. {{cite journal}}: Mungon ose është bosh parametri |language= (Ndihmë!)
Mark D. Decker. College of Biological Sciences, General Biology Program, University of Minnesota Frequently Asked Questions About the Texas Science Textbook Adoption Controversy Arkivuar 30 shtator 2010 tek Wayback Machine "The Discovery Institute and ID proponents have a number of goals that they hope to achieve using disingenuous and mendacious methods of marketing, publicity, and political persuasion. They do not practice real science because that takes too long, but mainly because this method requires that one have actual evidence and logical reasons for one's conclusions, and the ID proponents just don't have those. If they had such resources, they would use them, and not the disreputable methods they actually use.}}

[1]