Interesting piece on Intelligent Design titled Intelligent design – damaging good science and good theology:
The idea of intelligent design is that the universe, particularly the life contained therein, is too complex to have happened by chance as the theory of evolution would have it.
Therefore its sole basis lies in a negative: the failure to imagine how natural selection could arrive at the complexity of life we see all around us. We can perhaps sympathise with this notion since the fossil record has not preserved enough to demonstrate the continuity of the process and we must rely on our imagination to fill in the gaps. Nonetheless, modern biology continues to grow from strength to strength in fields as disparate as palaeobiology, neurophysiology, evolutionary psychology, molecular biology and genetics to name but a few.
It seems that biology is doing very well with only one underlying theory, Darwin’s theory of evolution. There is therefore no pressure from science to incorporate another theory, especially one for which there is no positive evidence.
But there is pressure from some sections of the church who look at the theory of evolution with dismay because it lacks any kind of teleology, any goal towards which it seeks to progress. This means that not only are human beings on this earth entirely by chance but also there is no meaning to their existence. The push to teach intelligent design theory, the idea that there was a guiding hand involved in evolution, is an effort to insert God into the teaching of science and to correct nihilistic conclusions that flow from it.
Intelligent design has displaced, at least in the public sphere, the push to teach creationism. Creationism is derived from a literal reading of the first two creation narratives and would have it that the universe was created in seven days a few thousands years ago – and that God placed dinosaur bones is the fossil record to amuse palaeobiologists. In the face of the discoveries of modern science this is just too silly for words.
Se also this piece by Rep. Rush Holt.
“Intelligent Design isn’t science – save it for philosophy or religion classes, or better yet church.”
“Evolution is just a theory! What are you so scared of? And why do you hate God?”
Repeat ad infinitum . . .
Hahaha, the above comment is probably right. Both the pieces John linked to are quite good, though.
Mr. John Cole, why do you hate religion?!?!? :-)
Because, he’s a lickspittle shill for Big Science. Duh.
‘Cause we all know that is where the “big bucks” are! ;)
Why does there have to be a God for someone to have a purpose?
In case anybody missed it, there is an entertaining exchange about ID, philosophy, science, and religion intermingled with the usual noise on the “Just Curious” thread. If it takes a teaser to to encourage you to go over there, consider this:
Betcha didn’t know that science is a belief system comparable to a religion.
Too much to summarize here. Go check it out.
Careful, don’t confuse purpose with meaning.
All these years I’ve believed that “purpose” and “meaning” were constructs of the human mind. Now people come along and tell me they’re actually impositions on humanity by God. I’m outraged. I guess I have to go out and kill someone to defend my belief.
According to whose interpretation? Bunch of dimwits, I’m sure.
Science answers how things work. Religion answers why. QUIT CONFUSING PHILOSOPHY WITH SCIENCE!
Dude, you gotta go check this out.
If it’s too complex for me then it’s wrong, it’s evil, because God loves me so he wouldn’t do that to me, even though, he must be bored with the simplicity.
The opposition party needs to learn that.
Some people simply have no appreciation for food and sex, oh, and blogging.
Look what I found:
And the ownership society too! Fascism, to boot.
So much for democracy.
Errr…jobius? Other than the fact that it’s also laughable and self-contradictory pretense, what does anarcho-capitalism have to do with ID?
The problem with anarcho-capitalism, or any form of anarchy is that it is the most base state. Anarchy is what happens when there are no rules or laws. However, you can’t really enforce Anarchy because if you did, you’d have to yield power to a central or defined authority – and then you wouldn’t be living in anarchy any more.
The long and the short of it is that anarcho-capitalism can only exist so long as people actively refuse to work together. The moment two or more people/companies join together you find yourself with a small oligarchy. And a group almost always manages to trump the individual so expect that small oligarchy to get very big very quickly. If we really wanted an anarchy, we’d first have to kick our anti-trust legislation into overdrive before we self-destructed our national, state, and local governments. After all, being rules by the state of Mexico or Taiwan or Mississippi isn’t all that functionally different from being ruled by General Mills Cereals Incorporated.
Because it’s facinating.
Um, because God told me too.
That’s what he said.
Ooo, looky, evacuees tales!
Is that really so far-fetched? I mean, He hid Saddam’s WMDs, so He’s capable of anything.
ANARCHISTS OF THE WORLD UNITE!!
Oh – um, wait a minute… um …
And you know why God hid those WMDs? Because he hates George Bush and wanted to make him look bad. Same thing with the fossil record.
And that’s why I’m an agnostic, guys and gals. I think that whatever is beyond this life, or whatever force is behind the beginning of the universe — it’s way beyond ANYTHING that our tiny little minds could comprehend. So instead of saying, “You know what? It’s not for us to know.” They say, “Well, it’s too complex for us to understand, so it must be GOD!!!! Yeah, that’s it!”