+- Scivillage.com Casual Discussion Science Forum (https://www.scivillage.com)
+-- Forum: Science (https://www.scivillage.com/forum-61.html)
+--- Forum: Logic, Metaphysics & Philosophy (https://www.scivillage.com/forum-80.html)
+--- Thread: My Perspective on Intelligent Design (/thread-6126.html)
Pages:
1
2
My Perspective on Intelligent Design - Ostronomos - Sep 12, 2018
Our general view of nature is that it is too simplistic to have had an intelligent designer, but this is actually a bias. If the universe is the mind of God, then it may be said to have been intelligently self-directed. Although blind nature appears random, there could to some extent be a level of reality at which intelligent design is predominant. At the sub-microscopic level, Quantum mechanics becomes relevant. That means our genetics could have been influenced by Quantum mechanics. The idea of solipsism says that our human perspective is special. So perhaps our physical appearances are influenced by our consciousness and it was predetermined. This would imply intelligent design to some extent.
RE: My Perspective on Intelligent Design - Leigha - Oct 29, 2018
(Sep 12, 2018 04:30 PM)Ostronomos Wrote: Our general view of nature is that it is too simplistic to have had an intelligent designer, but this is actually a bias. If the universe is the mind of God, then it may be said to have been intelligently self-directed. Although blind nature appears random, there could to some extent be a level of reality at which intelligent design is predominant. At the sub-microscopic level, Quantum mechanics becomes relevant. That means our genetics could have been influenced by Quantum mechanics. The idea of solipsism says that our human perspective is special. So perhaps our physical appearances are influenced by our consciousness and it was predetermined. This would imply intelligent design to some extent.
I think that people who aren't believers of ID, don't necessarily believe that nature is too simple, as much as they tend to believe that the universe and nature point to a random set of events, whereas ID points to order or pre-determination. But, in our limited intellect, can we imagine that a universe could be both pre-determined, and random? Is that at all possible?
RE: My Perspective on Intelligent Design - Magical Realist - Oct 29, 2018
I don't buy ID because I know nature is constantly ordering molecules and atoms and cells thru it's own energized processes and chain reactions and laws. There is no need for intelligence to organize matter into complex structures and systems as order is the nature of all happening. Time itself results in order. It imposes sequence and interdependence on events. Disorder and chaos too, as structures always dissolve over time and free their bound up energies into the universe. The order that nature spawns blindly and automatically puts to shame anything an intelligence could ever come up with. Look at the human brain--a marvel of complexity and functionality that far exceeds anything man has ever constructed.
RE: My Perspective on Intelligent Design - Zinjanthropos - Oct 29, 2018
As long as you think POOF!, an Intelligent Designer just popped into existence then you're ok. However I would like to know who or what designed the designer?
RE: My Perspective on Intelligent Design - Syne - Oct 29, 2018
(Oct 29, 2018 09:58 PM)Zinjanthropos Wrote: As long as you think POOF!, an Intelligent Designer just popped into existence then you're ok. However I would like to know who or what designed the designer?
Only contingent things require an origin.
RE: My Perspective on Intelligent Design - Zinjanthropos - Oct 29, 2018
(Oct 29, 2018 10:06 PM)Syne Wrote:(Oct 29, 2018 09:58 PM)Zinjanthropos Wrote: As long as you think POOF!, an Intelligent Designer just popped into existence then you're ok. However I would like to know who or what designed the designer?
Only contingent things require an origin.
No Poof?
RE: My Perspective on Intelligent Design - Syne - Oct 29, 2018
(Oct 29, 2018 11:05 PM)Zinjanthropos Wrote:(Oct 29, 2018 10:06 PM)Syne Wrote:(Oct 29, 2018 09:58 PM)Zinjanthropos Wrote: As long as you think POOF!, an Intelligent Designer just popped into existence then you're ok. However I would like to know who or what designed the designer?
Only contingent things require an origin.
No Poof?
Sorry, no.
RE: My Perspective on Intelligent Design - Zinjanthropos - Oct 30, 2018
(Oct 29, 2018 11:42 PM)SSyne Wrote:(Oct 29, 2018 11:05 PM)Zinjanthropos Wrote:(Oct 29, 2018 10:06 PM)Syne Wrote:(Oct 29, 2018 09:58 PM)Zinjanthropos Wrote: As long as you think POOF!, an Intelligent Designer just popped into existence then you're ok. However I would like to know who or what designed the designer?
Only contingent things require an origin.
No Poof?
Sorry, no.
Is there anything else on the No Poof list? I was wondering because if the Intelligent Designer didn't arrive in a Poof then what about the space, realm etc of it's existence? Like what was first, the IDer or the IDer's place to exist in? Do we call it a draw and simultaneity wins?
RE: My Perspective on Intelligent Design - Syne - Oct 30, 2018
(Oct 30, 2018 12:42 AM)Zinjanthropos Wrote: Is there anything else on the No Poof list? I was wondering because if the Intelligent Designer didn't arrive in a Poof then what about the space, realm etc of it's existence? Like what was first, the IDer or the IDer's place to exist in? Do we call it a draw and simultaneity wins?
If a designer is necessary it cannot be contingent upon anything, including a space in which to exist. There can really only be one necessary existence, otherwise two or more necessary existences would be defined by their differences, making them contingent upon one another.
RE: My Perspective on Intelligent Design - Zinjanthropos - Oct 30, 2018
I
(Oct 30, 2018 01:18 AM)Syne Wrote:(Oct 30, 2018 12:42 AM)Zinjanthropos Wrote: Is there anything else on the No Poof list? I was wondering because if the Intelligent Designer didn't arrive in a Poof then what about the space, realm etc of it's existence? Like what was first, the IDer or the IDer's place to exist in? Do we call it a draw and simultaneity wins?
If a designer is necessary it cannot be contingent upon anything, including a space in which to exist. There can really only be one necessary existence, otherwise two or more necessary existences would be defined by their differences, making them contingent upon one another.
The designer would be contingent upon an available space. Space first, designer 2nd. No place to exist , no designer. Thus a designer is a poof.
There's only one solution. The place to exist is the designer. Pretty much what we figure happened, even if we like to think different.