He defines intelligent design as the assertion “that evolution is real but guided by a supernatural intelligence.” This notion is certainly common among intelligent design proponents, but it is far from being required of them. The majority of design theorists do indeed believe that the designer indicated by their science lines up with the supernatural God indicated by their philosophy or religion. But this does not mean that design theorists are attempting to make a scientific theory based on their religious beliefs any more than atheistic evolutionists are attempting to make scientific theory based on their beliefs by promoting evolution.

This mistake renders moot Wilson’s later point that, “No scientific theory has been proffered or even imagined to explain the transcription from a supernatural force to organic reality.” Because intelligent design theory actually theorizes about the action of intelligent agents (something we see every day), it is completely unaffected by the existence or non-existence of any theory of transcendental activity.

Opponents of design theory seem to have an amazing amount of energy available to expend decrying intelligent design. However it often seems that they are unwilling to expend that same energy on understanding the theories of those they rail against. Chief among these miscounted arguments is just that one Wilson takes up in his piece. Design theory may be compatible with religion, but it does not spring from it or in any way require it. To say otherwise (without argumentation) is to mislead either by ignorance or deceit. Intelligent design asserts only a designing intelligence (surprisingly enough). It is the opponents of i.d. who thrust metaphysical arguments upon it.