# Why I Am an ID Proponent

**URL:** <https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/why-i-am-an-id-proponent/2955>\
**Category:** Side Conversation\
**Tags:** Design\
**Created:** [November 17, 2018, 3:32am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/why-i-am-an-id-proponent/2955 "2018-11-17T03:32:56Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 13

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Mung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a5b964/32.png) [@Mung](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Mung)\
**Post date:** [November 17, 2018, 6:01am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/why-i-am-an-id-proponent/2955/13 "2018-11-17T06:01:41Z")

</div>

> [@swamidass](#):
>
> I’m honestly confused by you @Mung. It seems like you are trying to occupy a middle ground that may not actually exist.

I do not disagree with you! I may in fact be trying to occupy a middle ground. It may in fact be the case that no middle ground is to be found. But I think you have indeed managed to identify the best description of where I stand. I am my own man. Hopefully that leads to progress in mutually understanding each other.

I absolutely welcome from you any clarifying questions you care to ask. I have nothing to hide.

> [@swamidass](#):
>
> Once again, which of the ID arguments do you actually support?

As a beginning, the arguments which point out the insufficiencies of Darwinism. We ought to be able to find common ground there, and if not I’d like to understand why not.

And I am likewise confused by you!

That poor arguments for ID exist is not, in my mind, a sufficient reason to reject intelligent design. And yet that appears to be the only reason you have given. You do not say that ID is not science. You do not say that ID is not testable. You do not say that ID is creationism in a cheap tuxedo. You do not say that ID is theologically untenable. You offer a single solitary reason for why you are not an ID proponent. Bad arguments.

Yet bad arguments exist on all sides of this controversy!

There are bad arguments for evolution. It does not follow that evolution is false.

In closing:

> [@swamidass](#):
>
> It seems like you are saying you are an ID proponent that doesn’t actually agree with any of their scientific arguments.

That would require that we enter into a discussion about which ID arguments are scientific and which are not. I’m willing to have that conversation.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/why-i-am-an-id-proponent/2955)._