The syllogism I have used for ID, was never meant to be used as a creationist argument, but only as a way to ASCERTAIN if an object or thing, is designed;
If something has the elements of design it is designed. (X is X, Law of identity)
Life has the elements of design
Therefore life is designed.
Now I am not arguing this argument here and now, I know you don't accept it, but can you accept the conclusion only says whether something is designed? It is not meant to say who or what the designer is, and has nothing to do with who or what the designer is.
Then that is not an argument for ID, because you haven't reached a conclusion that the designer is intelligent.
™ Version 4.2
(1)
