Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
0 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,585 Year: 2,842/9,624 Month: 687/1,588 Week: 93/229 Day: 4/61 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   A Plea to understanding: SCIENCE vs INTELLIGENT DESIGN
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1395 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 157 of 230 (655127)
03-07-2012 4:12 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by jchardy
02-23-2012 2:44 PM


do you mean ID or Deism?
Hi jchardy, and welcome to the fray.
Pardon me for stepping in at this stage of the debate and essentially starting back at the beginning.
Thus, to adherents of ID:
Benefit or harm; gains or losses; release or hindrance; promotion or impairment; injury or healing; progress or obstruction (to a defined or observed improvement) are all phenomena of purpose, --- not chance.
They began with a faith (an optimism, if you will), that everything has a purpose or reason for being, and that nothing really was simply a throw of the dice in an ultimate vacuum of non-purpose.
In I.D., at the very least, they believe that God (or the Designer) Loaded the dice, probably from the very beginning.
They concede their fundamental lack of control of the process but take comfort in the wonder of it. ID adherents do not have a need to feel in control of anything. They only seek to understand the "how’s and why’s" insofar as they and science are capable of providing clarity.
Message 29: I am a scientist who believes teleological principles MIGHT have led to and through the processes ending in where we are today. In my 50 years of searching, I have not found any evidence to absolutely rule out a "Designer" implicit in our existence. But I also don’t believe in magic. I believe in purpose as a POSSIBLE REASON for the evolution of the universe and life through 13.7 Billion years. It’s certainly true that that’s enough time for probability to do a lot, but the final answers are a long way away, and to deny everything based on bias and vitriol or repugnance is not the way of science and it should not be the way of faith either. ...
Message 35: You bet I’m a teleologist! I don’t distance myself from ID because the general concept of Intelligent Design appears to me to be frequently somehow misrepresented and matches most closely teleological foundations. ...
It seems to me, that what you are describing is Deism rather than ID, especially compared to the way ID is used in debate these days. To my mind the essential difference between IDologist and Deist is that Deists lets go of all previous religious beliefs, and uses science to the fullest extent to understand "life, the universe, and everything" (Douglas Adams) with open-minded skepticism, while IDologists fervently cling to previous beliefs and try to use ID as a crutch to prop up or support those beliefs. This difference causes many adherents of ID to attempt or claim that some findings of science are invalid, rather than looking at the evidence and science to see how we understand the workings of the universe etc.
See my thread Is ID properly pursued? for more.
Let me know.
Enjoy.
Edited by RAZD, : clrty

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by jchardy, posted 02-23-2012 2:44 PM jchardy has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1395 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 165 of 230 (655289)
03-09-2012 7:23 AM
Reply to: Message 162 by jchardy
03-09-2012 2:16 AM


Re: purpose in science
Hi again jchardy
My point is that there are plausible means by which an agent (far beyond our understanding) might manipulate the evolution both of the physical universe and of life and its evolution.
Of course it’s fundamentally imagination and NO it can never be verified (or disproven). But it’s an interesting concept is it not?
Agreed.
However, it still sounds more like Deism than ID as currently used by the majority of ID proponents and marketeers.
Message 160: The mistake IDers make is to even try to prove the concept of ID by attempting to disprove natural selection; or evolution in general or mathematically projected information about the course of the universe prior to the Big Bang; inflation or subsequently the evolution of life. They engage in a fools game, and it’s absolutely unnecessary, because if I am correct, fundamental proof of intelligent design can never be demonstrated.
And you appear to disagree with the way ID is currently being used and marketed by the majority of ID proponents and marketeers ...
Message 161: I really don’t disagree. Perhaps the best way to look at teleologic ID is as speculation or the proposal of un-testable hypotheses.
I would agree it should never be taught as science, but that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be brought in to discussion in science as an afterthought based on scientific foundation so long as it is qualified as palpably NONfactual, unverifiable and without more than speculative evidence. But it does not belong in the classroom as curriculum, certainly.
And with what current ID proponents are trying to do via politics (rather than science).
In Message 157 is said
It seems to me, that what you are describing is Deism rather than ID, especially compared to the way ID is used in debate these days. To my mind the essential difference between IDologist and Deist is that Deists lets go of all previous religious beliefs, and uses science to the fullest extent to understand "life, the universe, and everything" (Douglas Adams) with open-minded skepticism, while IDologists fervently cling to previous beliefs and try to use ID as a crutch to prop up or support those beliefs. This difference causes many adherents of ID to attempt or claim that some findings of science are invalid, rather than looking at the evidence and science to see how we understand the workings of the universe etc.
See my thread Is ID properly pursued? for more.
Have you looked into deism?
Enjoy.
Edited by RAZD, : clrty

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 162 by jchardy, posted 03-09-2012 2:16 AM jchardy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 169 by jchardy, posted 03-09-2012 3:11 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1395 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 171 of 230 (655335)
03-09-2012 3:41 PM
Reply to: Message 169 by jchardy
03-09-2012 3:11 PM


definitions of deism
Hi again jchardy,
NO. While Deism DOES "---presuppose the existence of a supreme being, specifically of a creator BUT "HE" does NOT intervene in the universe". I (and many teleologist IDers) believe that a Creator PROBABLY DID AND DOES take an ACTIVE role in both the initiation process of the universe, and --- by subtle effects at the quantum level, utilizing chaos and modifications of initial conditions of each component system, DID direct the evolution --- first of the universe and then of life as it evolved with goal toward first sentient and then sapient beings such as ourselves.
There is no orthodoxy to deism, and there are many that consider active roles possible. The minimalist definition I've seen is provided by
http://www.deism.com
quote:
Deism is the recognition of a universal creative force greater than that demonstrated by mankind, supported by personal observation of laws and designs in nature and the universe, perpetuated and validated by the innate ability of human reason coupled with the rejection of claims made by individuals and organized religions of having received special divine revelation.
Enjoy.
Edited by RAZD, : subtitle

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 169 by jchardy, posted 03-09-2012 3:11 PM jchardy has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024