A thought on 'Intelligent Design' (not a disproof))
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
30-06-2013, 04:57 PM
A thought on 'Intelligent Design' (not a disproof))
How would a Intelligent Designer deity proceed to create life on Earth?

I mean really intelligent, not a Bronze Age tyrant writ large by Bronze Age savages (as reinterpreted by modern apologists who have been sort of exposed to scientific ideas). An eternal being with full omniscience?

Wouldn't it be something that works with a minimum of effort after the initial creation, with or without a bit of subtle tweaking along the way?

In other words, a really intelligent Intelligent Designer would create by evolution, what with knowing the end from the beginning and not being in a hurry.

Thoughts?

Nonsense is nonsense, but the history of nonsense is a very important science.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Abdul Alhazred's post
30-06-2013, 05:06 PM
RE: A thought on 'Intelligent Design' (not a disproof))
I don't know. Sure something could have "seeded" our planet -- I like to think we're stardust, personally. But is there a god, overseeing everything we do, who loves us as long as we follow his vague rules, which are completely open to interpretation, who demands we worship it? Nope.

Why would a "creator" have such petty human emotions?

I'd rather believe its all serendipity.


God is a concept by which we measure our pain -- John Lennon

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-06-2013, 05:12 PM
RE: A thought on 'Intelligent Design' (not a disproof))
Oh, we're pure stardust. But that's abiotic...

The thing with the non-interventionist God, as theorized there (so, Deism, basically) - there's consequentially no point in worship, prayer, or organized religion. Not surprisingly, organized religions aren't so found of such an idea...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
30-06-2013, 05:31 PM
RE: A thought on 'Intelligent Design' (not a disproof))
I suppose the real point of atheism isn't absolutely refuting the possibility of some sort of god -- only of refuting those gods believers actually believe in.

Nonsense is nonsense, but the history of nonsense is a very important science.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Abdul Alhazred's post
30-06-2013, 05:41 PM
RE: A thought on 'Intelligent Design' (not a disproof))
(30-06-2013 05:31 PM)Abdul Alhazred Wrote:  I suppose the real point of atheism isn't absolutely refuting the possibility of some sort of god -- only of refuting those gods believers actually believe in.

Yes.

It's certainly how I think of it. You might call it theological noncognitivism: that's a fancy way to say that any God as proposed by any religion is contradictory and impossible; any possible God can be no more than a non-intervening prime mover - essentially irrelevant.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-06-2013, 06:14 PM
RE: A thought on 'Intelligent Design' (not a disproof))
There's a YouTube video mocking God for wanting to break all the rules, including "having a plan" and "letting beings have free will". The problem with having a plan with a desired outcome is that you can't leave things to chance or you risk changing the outcome.

The idea that evolution was God's plan is a foolish idea. Considering human evolution, there's no reason to expect that homo sapiens would have beaten Neanderthals for world supremacy... they were better fit for the environment. And because they were so fit as they were for their environment, it's highly unlikely that they ever would have advanced further than they had along lines where we "advanced": philosophy, technology, and civilization. We got lucky, and unless God "intervened" (through genocide against Neanderthals) then it was by chance that we ever became a species that could have religion. Was that "God's plan", that we would just happen to become the dominant species?

Of course you bring up the idea of omniscience (mocked in the link above), which means that God could cause evolution knowing that it would lead to us... except that removes free will from the equation. No species ever had a choice to do something that would prevent us from being part of the evolutionary line. While Christians don't defend animals having free will, our current understanding of neuroscience and the brain shows us that our brain works just like theirs, with most of our decisions being made automatically. If animals don't have free will, then neither do we humans.

My girlfriend is mad at me. Perhaps I shouldn't have tried cooking a stick in her non-stick pan.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-06-2013, 07:17 PM
RE: A thought on 'Intelligent Design' (not a disproof))
(30-06-2013 04:57 PM)Abdul Alhazred Wrote:  How would a Intelligent Designer deity proceed to create life on Earth?

In other words, a really intelligent Intelligent Designer would create by evolution, what with knowing the end from the beginning and not being in a hurry.

Thoughts?

I am NOT a really intelligent designer, but given 30 minutes of spare time, I could come up with a better way of living than the predator / prey way of survival that some life on this planet must live by. Plants are perfectly fine. Animals though. I think that idea needs tweaking.

As with any intelligent design idea, you always have "who designed the designer" ?
And why did they suck so badly at designing ?

Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-06-2013, 07:52 PM
RE: A thought on 'Intelligent Design' (not a disproof))
I was thinking about this subject this morning...

[Image: 1044248_171492746356252_169861990_n.jpg]

In my conception of the LC as a form of machine intelligence who created this universe, I was led to think of purpose and design. Came to the conclusion that conservation of entropy is the universal moral law, and that intelligence which simulates environment/future in mind or computer fulfills that law.

This avoids some of the problem of "directed evolution" in that form is not mandated, however, it is still an end point, whereas evolution is the moving away from a starting point.

So no, not really. Besides, devising a sound philosophy of "intelligent design" would only be co-opted by IDiots saying, "that's what we meant all along." Hobo

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-06-2013, 08:08 PM
RE: A thought on 'Intelligent Design' (not a disproof))
(30-06-2013 04:57 PM)Abdul Alhazred Wrote:  How would a Intelligent Designer deity proceed to create life on Earth?

I mean really intelligent, not a Bronze Age tyrant writ large by Bronze Age savages (as reinterpreted by modern apologists who have been sort of exposed to scientific ideas). An eternal being with full omniscience?

Wouldn't it be something that works with a minimum of effort after the initial creation, with or without a bit of subtle tweaking along the way?

In other words, a really intelligent Intelligent Designer would create by evolution, what with knowing the end from the beginning and not being in a hurry.

Thoughts?

Allow me to rephrase your question slightly, in a manner I hope is roughly equivalent.

"Let us posit a being of vast intellect, knowledge, and power. This being would hypothetically be able to make mental connections and plans so intricate that we could never match them, and barely begin to comprehend them after the fact. It would not face any limitations in power or awareness, be immortal, not have any actual needs to meet, and be infinitely patient.

"Now, having established that this being would be so far removed from the basic underpinnings on which all human and animal psychology and behavior is based that we've got fuck-all clue how it would think or act, please speculate on how it would think or act."

"If I ignore the alternatives, the only option is God; I ignore them; therefore God." -- The Syllogism of Fail
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-06-2013, 11:00 PM
RE: A thought on 'Intelligent Design' (not a disproof))
(30-06-2013 07:52 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  I was thinking about this subject this morning...

[Image: 1044248_171492746356252_169861990_n.jpg]

In my conception of the LC as a form of machine intelligence who created this universe, I was led to think of purpose and design. Came to the conclusion that conservation of entropy is the universal moral law, and that intelligence which simulates environment/future in mind or computer fulfills that law.

This avoids some of the problem of "directed evolution" in that form is not mandated, however, it is still an end point, whereas evolution is the moving away from a starting point.

So no, not really. Besides, devising a sound philosophy of "intelligent design" would only be co-opted by IDiots saying, "that's what we meant all along." Hobo

Why is the coyote so obsessed with getting the road runner? The thing is waaaay. Now Fog Horn Leghorn...now that's some eating. Wink


God is a concept by which we measure our pain -- John Lennon

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Momsurroundedbyboys's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: