People say, oh, it's impossible and illogical to make any inference to the possibility of agency in the development of living things, design in the evidence of living things.

But we make inferences like that all the time.

The forensic pathologist has to decide whether the body found at the side of the road was struck by a car, was shot with a gun, or whether the guy just died spontaneously,

and he's going to look at the evidence. I see a bullet hole here. It looks like somebody

shot him. That's agency. That's designed in another sense of the term. Somebody designed his

death. The archaeologist, when he digs up something from the, from the ancient ruin,

he has to decide, gee, it's kind of funny shape, it's all eroded, it's crumbled. Is this an

artifact or is it just a rock? And he has to look at the evidence and he believes he can make an

inference. Why should we somehow put living things and origins off limits to those kinds of arguments and questions

and inquiries? I think it's arbitrary and I don't think that we should allow ourselves to be

arbitrary. ID, the future, a podcast about evolution and intelligent design.

I think we can all agree that society is facing a lot of problems right now.

Everywhere you turn, you're likely to see evidence of error in thinking,

delusions that are hurting people, and a cloud of confusion and uncertainty around things

that may have seemed sure and certain until five minutes ago or recently.

In the realm of science, I think, is no exception.

Welcome to ID the Future.

I'm your host, Andrew McDermott.

Today I get to continue my conversation with Jay Bujyshefsky, a professor of government,

philosophy, and civic leadership at the University of Texas at Austin.

Internationally recognized for his work on natural law, self-deception, happiness, and ultimate purpose, he's widely read on

the unraveling and possible restoration of our common culture. Among his 20 previous books are

...