intelligent design, right and wrong

if there is no intelligent design, there is no right or wrong. becuase, then, we are simply an accident on the face of a great universe, with no purpose whatsoever in life. then you start getting into questions like, well, if we have no purpose what difference does it make as far as what we do. with no purpose, killing people is the same as eating icecream. if our society would take up that belief we would soon have a terrible state of anarchy on our hands. so, i would say there has to be intelligent design, and right and wrong, because without it, this world would be a horrible place.

I have to wonder how someone could make this sort of argument.What it implies is that humans can have no value in themselves and that the only moral purpose is serving some nebulous "purpose".It follows then that the argument assuems that the actual act of killing a human is not in itself any different from the act of eating ice cream. Indeed, the act of killing a human being may easily be better provided it serves this supposed "purpose". I would be very afraid of people who beleived that.I am glad that most people do not really believe that some cosmic purpose is the basis of morality.

quote:

---

if there is no intelligent design, there is no right or wrong. becuase, then, we are simply an accident on the face of a great universe, with no purpose whatsoever in life.

---

Excuse me? Since when did humans need God to have a purpose? As an Agnostic, I feel that my life has plenty of purpose. This is probably my one shot at existence; I want to have a positive effect while I'm here.Purpose is decided by individuals and communities and is not dependent upon belief in the supernatural.

quote:

---

then you start getting into questions like, well, if we have no purpose what difference does it make as far as what we do. with no purpose, killing people is the same as eating icecream.

---

I have already explained that purpose has little to do with belief in the supernatural.Also, even if the universe is Intelligently Designed it doesn't mean that the Designer cares about what we do, or has any direct dealing in our everyday lives.

quote:

---

if our society would take up that belief we would soon have a terrible state of anarchy on our hands.

---

Let's see, several of the most long-standing conflicts and wars around the world have arisen out of disagreement over religious matters; the Middle East, Ireland, the Balkans. Let's not forget the Inquisition, the Crusades, the Holocaust.Seems that, historically, blind belief without reason produces anarchy quite often.

quote:

---

so, i would say there has to be intelligent design, and right and wrong, because without it, this world would be a horrible place.

---

I'll reiterate;The universe could be ID'ed, but this would not be evidence for a moral God which cares about us and what we do."Right and wrong" as concepts exist as a necessary construct for humans to live together in communities, and this is why what constitutes "right and wrong" are different communities and cultures all across the world.These constructs don't require religious or supernatural belief to be followed.That's why our prisons aren't filled up with Athiests, but are, in fact, filled up with believers.Now I have a question for you about the nature of Intelligent Design:How do we tell the difference between an Intelligently designed system and a natural one which we1) don't understand yet, or2) don't have the ability to understand?------------------
"Evolution is a 'theory', just like gravity. If you don't like it, go jump off a bridge."

Didn't we just go through all this?

"I want to have a positive effect while I'm here."
who decides if its positive or not? with no god, or higher power that leaves us to set our own standards. you can solve world hunger, and make the world a peaceful place, but with everyone setting there own standards, they can decide its the worst thing ever done.

Surprisingly, almost all humans agree that if they have enough resources to feed, house, and protect themselves and children, they'd consider that a positive thing.We all set our own standards, to be sure, but our own instincts are too powerful to ignore. People want food and shelter. Biologically you can count on that.Sure, some people might decide that a world of peace is a bad thing. But you can count on them being in the vast, vast minority. Just because there's no god to set standards doesn't mean you can't count on certain aspects of human behavior.

that in itself proves there is a higher power. human instinct, that doesnt happen by chance. that has to be painfully obvious. even if we could all just come together by random chance and accident, the instincts simply could not.

Ever thought of the idea that just maybe instincts have a survival benefit?

quote:

---

Ever thought of the idea that just maybe instincts have a survival benefit?

---

Exactly. How this is proof of a designer eludes me. Maybe some evidence could be presented...?

Animals have instincts. Those instincts are always aimed at survival, reproduction, and propogation of genes. Ours are no different.There's clearly nothing divine about instinct. What are the odds that it would come out this way by random mutation and natural selection? 1/1, in my opinion. Prove me wrong. Your personal incredulity doesn't count.

There IS no right and wrong in a an absolute sense.You are implying with this that atheists go about killing,
raping, pillaging etc.Our upbringing and genetic predispositions affect how we as
individuals stick to the socially constructed right's and wrong's
of the culture in which we live.People often bringing up 'killing' in this context, and yet there
isn't a culture in the world (not individuals but cultures)
that doesn't justify killing in some circumstances (and that
includes killing humans) [Except perhaps strict budhists].Laws are constructed to control the masses, and religious systems
put forward a morality that had the same intent.Laws are backed up by prison or execution.
Religious systems are backed up by concepts of eternal suffering
in one sense or another.

Humans didn't come about by random chance and accident.Humans came about via millions of years of selection amongst
various traits that gave a survival advantage in particular
circumstances of environments. Many of these traits are modified
at random ... effectively by an error in the genetic copying process.There is nothing random about the process of evolutionary change.

Don't forget the Amish!Of course they are the exception among Xtian denominations. And that is something I wonder about what with all this talk of Xtianity being the only source of peace and meaning in the world.Most Xtian denominations (as organized religions)have stood against peace and knowledge for most of their existence. Sure their leaders talk about peace and truth, but this "peace" does not seem to reach beyond fellow believers, and "truth" is defined as filtering reality through a singular text with many different interpretations.In fact the vast number of possible Xtian "truths" have led to so many horrific conflicts between Xtians themselves, it makes the idea that Xtianity unifies anyone in peaceful union and a common morality almost laughable.Xtianity is just as splintered morally as any group of atheists/agnostics, only most Xtians also have an overriding drive to convert others to their specific beliefs... by force if necessary.I'm not saying that atheism/agnosticism is the best way to peace and a common morality. I'm saying that the meaning a personal belief in Christ generates is just as good as the meaning an atheist or agnostic creates for themselves while learning how to interact with others.Perhaps the only difference is the latter group has less extra-worldly hangups to impose on others in this life. Then again some atheists get all bent out of shape regarding economic/political forms and do just as much damage trying to convert others to that.Why can't people be content that others find meaning in this life from many different sources? And realize that knowledge about this life does not come from any source of personal "meaning"?------------------
holmes

"There IS no right and wrong in a an absolute sense." therefore i can do whatever i want and its right. i rest my case.

Then you've rested it on a non sequitor.Assume there IS an absolute right and wrong. Why can't you ignore it? What stops you?Eventual judgement, probably, by some deity.Ok, so now assume there is no absolute right and wrong dictated by a deity. Only the conventions that human societies establish for themselves.What happens if you break these rules? You get judged by whatever body was put in place by society to do the judging.What's the difference? Either way you get judged.Tell ya what. Do whatever you want - take whatever you like, kill whoever you think needs killing.See how far it gets you. You'll be judged far sooner by our laws than you will be by your god's.Our society has mechanisms to ensure that a person's own conception of right and wrong tends to agree with the conceptions of the society as a whole. No absolute morality is required for this phenomenon; just a knowlege of sociology.