Comments on: Intelligent Design http://kaivonfintel.org/2005/08/04/intelligent-design/ semantics etc. Sat, 27 Feb 2010 21:20:56 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Tony Marmo http://kaivonfintel.org/2005/08/04/intelligent-design/comment-page-1/#comment-261 Tony Marmo Fri, 05 Aug 2005 07:04:44 +0000 http://www.semantics-online.org/wp/uncategorized/2005/08/intelligent-design#comment-261 <p>The width of the canyon that separates believers from non-believers in some industrial countries is startling, to say the least. But there is one crucial Philosophical point behind this discussion: the strange way premises and consequences are glued together. The Intelligent Design of life forms and of the functioning of ecosystems as a whole is an undeniable property though, it is not obvious is that such property entails two things:</p> <blockquote><ol><li>That the intelligence behind the design is a Deity;</li> <li>That evolution is not an essential checking mechanism that is part of the very intelligent functioning/design.</li> </ol></blockquote> <p>It is possible to assume that the laws of nature together form an intelligent system of some sort (not necessarily a Deity). And the belief in God does not mean that God is not an evolutionary or did not cause things to evolve. There is no reason to believe that immutability is or is not an evidence of divine intervention or of supreme intelligence. Moreover, the Bible is not a book about Natural History. There are no terms of comparison between a scientific theory and a sacred book. The question </p> <blockquote><i>Do you believe in the Bible or in the evolution</i></blockquote> <p>is nonsensical, just like: </p> <blockquote><i>Do you like Nelson Mandela or the Beatles?</i></blockquote> <p>None can make any sense of either question and debate it rationally. None can compare things of completely different natures!</p> The width of the canyon that separates believers from non-believers in some industrial countries is startling, to say the least. But there is one crucial Philosophical point behind this discussion: the strange way premises and consequences are glued together. The Intelligent Design of life forms and of the functioning of ecosystems as a whole is an undeniable property though, it is not obvious is that such property entails two things:

  1. That the intelligence behind the design is a Deity;
  2. That evolution is not an essential checking mechanism that is part of the very intelligent functioning/design.

It is possible to assume that the laws of nature together form an intelligent system of some sort (not necessarily a Deity). And the belief in God does not mean that God is not an evolutionary or did not cause things to evolve. There is no reason to believe that immutability is or is not an evidence of divine intervention or of supreme intelligence. Moreover, the Bible is not a book about Natural History. There are no terms of comparison between a scientific theory and a sacred book. The question

Do you believe in the Bible or in the evolution

is nonsensical, just like:

Do you like Nelson Mandela or the Beatles?

None can make any sense of either question and debate it rationally. None can compare things of completely different natures!

]]>