At the end of each year, I review the accomplishments of the intelligent design research program. This year, substantial progress has been made toward demonstrating that the design framework is indispensable to biological research. In addition, our scientists and engineers have further laid the foundation for a comprehensive and actionable theory of biological design (TOBD). When you are done reading this review, please click here to add your support for our work.
Scholars in our community have, for over 25 years, developed rigorous approaches for identifying design and have applied these methodologies to living systems, arguing that intelligent agency offers the best explanation for their origin. Newer projects have moved from detecting design to demonstrating that the design framework generates more accurate predictions and yields a deeper understanding of biological systems. Many of these projects were showcased at the recent Conference on Engineering in Living Systems (CELS). I will share only a few notable examples.
Engineering Behind Adaptation
Several CELS presentations described the Engineering Research Group (ERG) investigations into the design principles underlying biological adaptation. Critics of neo-Darwinism have long argued that while the theory struggles to account for large-scale transformations (macroevolution), it nonetheless provides an adequate explanation for small-scale changes (microevolution). However, this concession is itself overly generous. Increasing evidence suggests that even short-term, small-scale adaptive changes are better explained within an engineering framework than by the standard evolutionary model.
ERG biologists, engineers, and affiliated scholars have identified multiple systems that enable organisms to monitor environmental conditions and respond through targeted adjustments. These systems employ features typically associated with engineering, including sensors, control logic, and pre-programmed responses. Even genetic variation appears to exhibit planning and foresight. Mutations are not entirely random; they are often biased toward changes more likely to yield beneficial outcomes. Moreover, the genome’s informational architecture supports the segregation and rapid dissemination of advantageous genetic profiles within populations. Taken together, these findings suggest that anatomy, physiology, genome architecture, and genetic variation have been engineered to enable adaptation that is much faster and more effective than would be possible through undirected processes.
ERG researchers are identifying the strategies and engineering principles undergirding adaptation. Although this work parallels the efforts of leading evolutionary biologists and geneticists (here, here), it is producing deeper insights because ERG investigators are not constrained by assumptions that preclude design-based explanations and because they bring a fuller range of engineering tools and concepts to their analyses. This research is expected to yield multiple publications over the next two years. We cannot immediately highlight all the research to protect our early-career biologists, but it will comprise a central feature of the developing TOBD.
Ultimate Engineering in Life
Stuart Burgess, a leading authority on biomimicry, studies the engineering principles underlying animal anatomy and physiology and applies them to human technologies. His research demonstrates that animals consistently exhibit optimal design features tailored to their habitats and modes of activity, as well as design patterns and principles employed in human engineering (here, here, here, here, here). Burgess was awarded the 2019 IMechE James Clayton Prize for the most significant contribution to mechanical engineering science in the UK. He attributes his success to studying biological systems through a design-based framework and applying the engineering principles underlying them to technological innovation.
He delivered a keynote address at CELS summarizing his forthcoming book, which describes how life exemplifies the best possible design, which he calls ultimate engineering. Living systems exhibit capabilities, energy efficiencies, and levels of optimality that far surpass even the most impressive achievements of human engineering. Burgess also cited numerous evolutionary biologists who have argued that evolutionary constraints should yield designs inferior to those produced by human engineers, the opposite of what is consistently observed in nature. He concluded by recounting several private conversations with accomplished biologists who acknowledge that life appears designed rather than evolved, yet refrain from expressing their view publicly for fear of repercussions.
Application of Systems Engineering Tools
Other CELS presenters described their application of systems engineering modeling tools to uncover the high-level design logic of living systems. James Johansen applied SysML to the study of chemotaxis, the flagellum’s built-in guidance mechanism. His analysis revealed insights into the system’s navigational and organizational logic, which could only be understood within the context of an engineering framework. His recent talk described his follow-up study of the engineering principles underlying differences in flagellar designs.
Similarly, staff biologist Emily Reeves and Texas A&M engineering professor Gerald Fudge applied the modeling tool OPM to glycolysis, demonstrating that this core metabolic pathway exhibits standard features of human engineering, including “modularity, optimality, robustness, common protocols, and design reuse.” Their systems-engineering-based approach identified knowledge gaps, generated predictions, and demonstrated how the pathway can be better understood by considering inferred system requirements rather than relying on reductionist assumptions. Both projects resulted in peer-reviewed publications that not only demonstrate the value of the design framework but also provide a methodology for application to diverse systems (here, here). Their systems-engineering approaches will also contribute to TOBD.
Blood Flow to the Brain
As a final example, pediatric neurosurgeon Michael Egnor investigated why blood flow into the brain appears out of sync with the heartbeat. His assumption that the human brain is a designed system inspired him to collaborate with engineers to identify the design principles behind this observation. His team discovered that the anatomy of the skull, brain, and blood vessels form a cerebral Windkessel: a system employing bandstop and bandpass filters to generate a steady blood flow into the brain. Without these filters, the pulsing blood flow would burst the brain’s fragile capillaries.
Egnor’s research not only led to several publications (here, here, here), but it also reshaped physicians’ understanding of several types of brain pathology and head trauma. His insights are also leading to very different approaches to therapy that could yield much better outcomes. Egnor’s research will serve as a showcase example of the application of TOBD in medical research. As with Burgess, his assumption of design has propelled him to become a leader in his field.