How does Intelligent Design work?

August1991 · March 27, 2013

I can understand distance, or Cartesian co-ordinates. I can visualise a point in 3-axes space. I can even imagine 4-dimensional co-ordinates. But for gawdsakes, what is "time"? (IOW, what is "speed" - let alone "acceleration")?

Why can I go backwards in distance, but not in time?

Or, what is chance, probability? (What is the meaning of the word "random"?)

Why do such constants as π and natural e exist? (I suspect that these constants must exist throughout our universe, and all possible universes.)

-----

Betsy is right to wonder - and I won't belittle her faith. If you don't wonder too, then I reckon that you are passing beside the wonderful life that by grace you can enjoy.

Edited March 27, 2013 by August1991

The_Squid · March 27, 2013

Bonam, DogonPorch and TheSquid, it would be better to admit that in some cases, we simply don't know. That's the true scientific method. There's always doubt which, btw, is not faith.

No shit.

Canuckistani · March 27, 2013

He would have been better off addressing that reminder to Betsy. Betsy certainly seems to know for sure, tho she's not willing to tell us about it.

DogOnPorch · March 27, 2013

Bonam, DogonPorch and TheSquid, it would be better to admit that in some

cases, we simply don't know. That's the true scientific method. There's

always doubt which, btw, is not faith.

Nobody except betsy has all the answers. If there is some super intelligent entity out there responsible for the Universe, it certainly wouldn't be as described by Bronze Age humans who thought the planet was flat. Plus I doubt it would be aware, let alone care that you didn't give 10% of your money to the church or forgot to stone/behead an unbeliever...etc.

btw...you're known as a 'Diplomat' over at Flame Warriors...

GostHacked · March 27, 2013

I can understand distance, or Cartesian co-ordinates. I can visualise a point in 3-axes space. I can even imagine 4-dimensional co-ordinates. But for gawdsakes, what is "time"? (IOW, what is "speed" - let alone "acceleration")?

Why can I go backwards in distance, but not in time?

Or, what is chance, probability? (What is the meaning of the word "random"?)

Why do such constants as π and natural e exist? (I suspect that these constants must exist throughout our universe, and all possible universes.)

-----

Betsy is right to wonder - and I won't belittle her faith. If you don't wonder too, then I reckon that you are passing beside the wonderful life that by grace you can enjoy.

We all have the right to wonder, it's what drives us on the whole. Discovery of what our universe is like and what it is made up of. However Betsy skips over all that and gets right to the punch line saying 'god did it'.

The rest of us know that we have just scratched the surface of our knowledge when it comes to the universe, evolution and how things got all started. And at least the admission is there that we could be wrong. Call it the humble approach to it all. It comes with great hubris to say and say with 100% certainty, with only faith as your certainty, that god did all this.

Not to mention , black holes exist. One is at the center of each galaxy from what we can tell so far.

GostHacked · March 27, 2013

Nobody except betsy has all the answers. If there is some super intelligent entity out there responsible for the Universe, it certainly wouldn't be as described by Bronze Age humans who thought the planet was flat.

This is a good point. God must have fooled them to think that the earth was flat. God some kind of prankster too?

DogOnPorch · March 27, 2013

This is a good point. God must have fooled them to think that the earth was flat. God some kind of prankster too?

As long as 'God' stays out of the science class, it doesn't matter if betsy wishes to believe in Abraham's desert deity. It's when her sort want everybody to drink the same kool-aid that we start getting problems. It's similar to teaching the stork theory as to why babies are born.

DogOnPorch · March 27, 2013

We all have the right to wonder, it's what drives us on the whole. Discovery of what our universe is like and what it is made up of. However Betsy skips over all that and gets right to the punch line saying 'god did it'.

The rest of us know that we have just scratched the surface of our knowledge when it comes to the universe, evolution and how things got all started. And at least the admission is there that we could be wrong. Call it the humble approach to it all. It comes with great hubris to say and say with 100% certainty, with only faith as your certainty, that god did all this.

Not to mention , black holes exist. One is at the center of each galaxy from what we can tell so far.

The spirals and ellipticals seem to have or had central massive black holes. Gigantic M87's CMBH is actually shooting a jet of matter along each magnetic axis...one of which is visible via Hubble.

Part of massive M87 is on the left.

Bonam · March 27, 2013

Huh?

Huh?

"Huh" what? Is that your only response when presented with (apparently) new information?

Canuckistani · March 27, 2013

The philosopher that August refers to is certainly not in Betsy's corner. He's not posititing an all wise and powerful being who makes things and drops them down on earth, but a universe with consciousness at its root, and an evolving consciousness - the universe is getting to know itself. If that's God, he was a zygote when the universe is born, and has some growing up to do along with the rest of us. The philosopher is saying that hard materialism doesn't explain a huge part of our existence, our consciousness.

Edited March 27, 2013 by Canuckistani

Mighty AC · March 27, 2013

As long as 'God' stays out of the science class, it doesn't matter if betsy wishes to believe in Abraham's desert deity. It's when her sort want everybody to drink the same kool-aid that we start getting problems. It's similar to teaching the stork theory as to why babies are born.

Agreed. I'd also add that 'God' can not be used to justify a position on policy arguments. If an individual person does not want to use birth control, wed someone of the same sex or treat sexes and races equally because they believe their god ordered that position, then by all means follow along if you like. However, a particular spiritual view cannot be used to backstop policy that would force everyone to abide by the apparent wishes of their superstition.

DogOnPorch · March 27, 2013

Agreed. I'd also add that 'God' can not be used to justify a position on policy arguments. If an individual person does not want to use birth control, wed someone of the same sex or treat sexes and races equally because they believe their god ordered that position, then by all means follow along if you like. However, a particular spiritual view cannot be used to backstop policy that would force everyone to abide by the apparent wishes of their superstition.

But here's the rub. It's religion's job...with a few minor exceptions...to make us drink that kool-aid. No questions asked. Especially the important ones. Sometimes at gunpoint. Science seriously gets in the way of folks such as, I suppose, betsy, who insists the Universe is only about 10,000 years old and Earth and humans in particular, the greatest things EVER located in the very centre. A special, privileged place. Much like a conspiracy theorist, it's also that rush of feeling that you DO have all the answers while the misguided sheep/sinners wallow in their MSM lies/scientific theories that is attractive. Not to mention all that hard critical thinking can be done away with...forever!! You have the answer.

Edited March 27, 2013 by DogOnPorch

Mighty AC · March 27, 2013

I can't imagine having the kind of devotion and suspension of critical thinking necessary to be religious or a conspiracy theorist. What does it take to be a person that subscribes to a belief, supported only by their own faith that it is true, so strongly that they deny detectable observable evidence? I'd say it takes delusion; and in most cases delusion achieved through childhood indoctrination.

Should the purposeful installation of willful ignorance or delusion be considered a form of child abuse?

bush_cheney2004 · March 27, 2013

I can't imagine having the kind of devotion and suspension of critical thinking necessary to be religious or a conspiracy theorist. What does it take to be a person that subscribes to a belief, supported only by their own faith that it is true, so strongly that they deny detectable observable evidence? I'd say it takes delusion; and in most cases delusion achieved through childhood indoctrination.

You mean like the Santa Claus, Tooth Fairy, and Easter Bunny ? Or maybe just the millions who visit a gambling casino ? Or maybe you mean the parents praying next to their child's hospital bed ?

Sorry...but "faith" and "hope" matter to a lot of people.

Should the purposeful installation of willful ignorance or delusion be considered a form of child abuse?

No, otherwise nobody would attend Leafs games.

Edited March 27, 2013 by bush_cheney2004

Canuckistani · March 27, 2013

You mean like the Santa Claus, Tooth Fairy, and Easter Bunny ? Or maybe just the millions who visit a gambling casino ? Or maybe you mean the parents praying next to their child's hospital bed ?

Sorry...but "faith" and "hope" matter to a lot of people.

No, otherwise nobody would attend Leafs games.

Faith and hope matter to most. Depressed people have a better hold on reality (ie the odds of something occurring) that non-depressed. Who wants to be depressed. Getting up in the morning is a statement of hope.

But those parents praying to God to not let their kid die. It's understandable when faced with impotence to protect your child. But what are they saying? If God saves their kid, but not the one in the next bed, does He love their kid more? Are they better people. And why did God give that diseae to the kid in teh first place? Basically they are appealing for mercy from a cruel and capricious dictator.

As long as believers in Santa etc don't demand that he be taught in science class, it's all good. Most adults grow out of that belief - maybe if they grow up enough they'll grow out of beleiving in the Guy in the Sky too.

DogOnPorch · March 27, 2013

I can't imagine having the kind of devotion and suspension of critical thinking necessary to be religious or a conspiracy theorist. What does it take to be a person that subscribes to a belief, supported only by their own faith that it is true, so strongly that they deny detectable observable evidence? I'd say it takes delusion; and in most cases delusion achieved through childhood indoctrination.

Should the purposeful installation of willful ignorance or delusion be considered a form of child abuse?

Richard Dawkins thinks so. Are there Liberal children? Republican children? Only religion brands a subjective label at birth.

BC-2004: Sorry...but "faith" and "hope" matter to a lot of people.

They indeed do. However all the faith in the world won't make the Earth 10,000 years old.

bush_cheney2004 · March 27, 2013

....They indeed do. However all the faith in the world won't make the Earth 10,000 years old.

Doesn't have to....Jesus specialized in violating math and science principles.

Mighty AC · March 27, 2013

You mean like the Santa Claus, Tooth Fairy, and Easter Bunny ? Or maybe just the millions who visit a gambling casino ? Or maybe you mean the parents praying next to their child's hospital bed ?

Sorry...but "faith" and "hope" matter to a lot of people.

No, otherwise nobody would attend Leafs games.

Praying or hoping for good things to happen does not force people to deny reality and hope isn't limited to the religious. Santa and Easter Bunny stories are temporary tales we let kids believe for a short time. I'm really narrowing the focus to those that would deny actual evidence that clashes with biblical teachings or a conspiracy theory. So I guess Leaf fans who believe that somehow the current team is different than the mediocre lower end playoff teams of 8 years ago would qualify.

So I'm really just wondering if teaching children to devalue evidence and deny reality is abusive in some way. Faith is belief without evidence. Should it be wrong to encourage kids to hold iron clad beliefs without evidence? Does that hurt them or society? Is it on par with teaching children to discriminate based on race, sex, sexual orientation, etc.?

bush_cheney2004 · March 27, 2013

Praying or hoping for good things to happen does not force people to deny reality and hope isn't limited to the religious. Santa and Easter Bunny stories are temporary tales we let kids believe for a short time. I'm really narrowing the focus to those that would deny actual evidence that clashes with biblical teachings or a conspiracy theory. So I guess Leaf fans who believe that somehow the current team is different than the mediocre lower end playoff teams of 8 years ago would qualify.

I just took your original post at face value and injected some reality into it. It's not a simple matter to demand or expect that everyone, including children give up on faith totally in favor of a proven "reality". Some people can't handle that much reality.

So I'm really just wondering if teaching children to devalue evidence and deny reality is abusive in some way. Faith is belief without evidence. Should it be wrong to encourage kids to hold iron clad beliefs without evidence? Does that hurt them or society? Is it on par with teaching children to discriminate based on race, sex, sexual orientation, etc.?

No...faith is all around us in many ways unrelated to religion. Tonight I will drive through many controlled intersections in an automobile, with the faith that all cross traffic will obey lights and signs and not t-bone me to death.

DogOnPorch · March 27, 2013

Doesn't have to....Jesus specialized in violating math and science principles.

That he did.

Mighty AC · March 27, 2013

No...faith is all around us in many ways unrelated to religion. Tonight I will drive through many controlled intersections in an automobile, with the faith that all cross traffic will obey lights and signs and not t-bone me to death.

You are aware of the rules of the road, driving precepts and from experience know that they are followed a large proportion of the time. In your example you have belief based on evidence. Religious faith encourages strong belief without it.

The_Squid · March 27, 2013

You are aware of the rules of the road, driving precepts and from experience know that they are followed a large proportion of the time. In your example you have belief based on evidence. Religious faith encourages strong belief without it.

And if evidence shows that people are running the intersection willy-nilly, BushCheney will likely take this new evidence into account to slow down and look both ways. Someone who only works on faith alone would plow through because he knows (despite the evidence) that those other people will stop.

Bonam · March 27, 2013

So I'm really just wondering if teaching children to devalue evidence and deny reality is abusive in some way. Faith is belief without evidence. Should it be wrong to encourage kids to hold iron clad beliefs without evidence? Does that hurt them or society? Is it on par with teaching children to discriminate based on race, sex, sexual orientation, etc.?

Of course it is. Sadly, the prevalent opinion is that the right of people to believe in such delusions, and to indoctrinate their children in such false beliefs, is as paramount to the fundamentals of our society as are rights like life, liberty, free speech, etc. While our schools don't usually teach religious nonsense, they do teach that religious nonsense must be respected and treated seriously. All of this is not likely to change very quickly.

All we can hope for is that people in our society are exposed to enough rational/critical thinking, real-world evidence, etc, that they have the opportunity to eventually shed any indoctrination they may have been subjected to and instead act like thinking rational beings. And for the most part, that is true, and is leading to slowly declining religiosity in most developed countries.

g_bambino · March 28, 2013

And if evidence shows that people are running the intersection willy-nilly, BushCheney will likely take this new evidence into account to slow down and look both ways. Someone who only works on faith alone would plow through because he knows (despite the evidence) that those other people will stop.

Well, the good Dr Gregory House did put it this way:

You can have all the faith you want in spirits, and the afterlife, and heaven and hell, but when it comes to this world, don't be an idiot. Cause you can tell me you put your faith in God to put you through the day, but when it comes time to cross the road, I know you look both ways.

bush_cheney2004 · March 28, 2013

And if evidence shows that people are running the intersection willy-nilly, BushCheney will likely take this new evidence into account to slow down and look both ways. Someone who only works on faith alone would plow through because he knows (despite the evidence) that those other people will stop.

....and yet people/drivers are t-boned every day, even with such knowledge. At some point faith in other drivers enters the equation. It has nothing to do with religion.