Invoking The Voyagers Against Id Options

[ljk4-1]

Cornell President Rawlings Condemns Intelligent Design

Drawing from sources ranging from Cornell's founders to Voyager
space missions, Interim President Hunter R. Rawlings III condemned
the push to teach intelligent design in public schools Friday. The
attack came during the president's State of...

http://www.cornellsun.com/vnews/display.v/...4/435c7762cf891


"The desire to understand the world and the desire to reform it are the two great engines of progress." - Bertrand Russell

[Guest_Richard Trigaux_*]

I would add that, to somewhat recenter the topic on something more or less related to space, that some purpose (if not ID) could be incorporated into cosmological scenarios.

Today most accepted cosmology theories study how the physical universe evolves from an intitial state (the singularity at the big bang). But they do not tell why this singularity exists. I say exists in the present tense, as, at this moment, time as we experience it has no meaning, so the question is "why the universe exists" and not "why it appeared". (to be exact some speculations are made about "before the Big bang", most of them predicting that many universe can exist).

Today accepted theories about life evolution say that this evolution is an auto-formative process, which can create complex structures from mere simplicity. This goes straight against the idea of Intelligent Design, as self-formative processes can generate structures which much ressemble very clever engineer designs for far reached purposes. So thinking, like literalists do, that life forms were designed by God is today really very naïve and it is understandable that it makes biology scientists angry.

So if there is really a God and a purpose, it is not to be seek into biology processes. It is obviously something deeply related to consciousness, meaning of life and eventually happiness. Is this matter related to cosmology and the existence of this universe? Do only exist universes where life evolves toward consciousness and wisdom, or do exist any universes with no life? If an universe contains no scientists to observe it, does it exist?

[helvick]

So thinking, like literalists do, that life forms were designed by God is today really very naïve and it is understandable that it makes biology scientists angry. 

So if there is really a God and a purpose, it is not to be seek into biology processes. It is obviously something deeply related to consciousness, meaning of life and eventually happiness. Is this matter related to cosmology and the existence of this universe? Do only exist universes where life evolves toward consciousness and wisdom, or do exist any universes with no life? If an universe contains no scientists to observe it, does it exist?

There certainly are extremely intriguing questions facing us that are so difficult to encompass that they can only be dealt with by hypothesis and, dare I say it, belief: The nature of consciousness; what exactly is spirituality?; if there was a big bang then how do you deal with the concept of "before the big bang" ?.

Speciation (and evolution) is so solid as a theory that it certainly does not qualify as an area that can't be wholly understood from a rational scientific point of view. The current discussions on whether or not the "Pioneer anomoly" or any other data from current probes can provide data that will force us to adjus our current Newtonian\Einsteinian theory of gravity don't qualify either as all of these are perfectly manageable within the context of standard rational scientific investigation. We can make falsifiable predictions, investigate and get answers that prove or refute the assertions. We can (and do) carry out experiments and create accurate theoretical models.

No doubt there are researchers out there pushing the edge of the envelope on understanding the mind who are preparing a scientifically rational model as I type but I haven't come across any yet. Likewise there are plenty of Cosmologists who are foaming at the mouth at my earlier comment as they say that there is no such thing as "before the big bang" so the question is meaningless but that just doesn't cut the mustard for me as that requires me to believe that well, it all just started which is logically equivalent to "God did it" in my book.

Spirituality is one that I have difficulty with because I don't understand it or empathise with it as a concept at all. Frankly I don't see the need (personally) which makes it very hard for me to take discussions on it seriously. Why does there need to be a higher purpose? After all very little that we see on earth or in the universe makes it seem at all likely that such a "Higher Purpose", if it exists, is anything but a very, very cruel purpose indeed. Why have predators and prey? Diseases? Death? What purpose do the myriad of hugely destructive forces in the universe have apart from just being forces? Personally I think I'd have a hard time remaining sane if I thought there was a "higher purpose" because I cannot see how such a thing could have any hand in the way things are. So I remain a happy rational atheist for the time being even though I have no explanation for how I'm able to think and cannot for the life of me get my head around why "what happened before the big bang" is a meaningless question.

[Bob Shaw]

Considering the number of accidents, cock-ups and plain disasters we see in the universe at large (and locally), isn't it best to assume that the ID scenario is indeed, quite wrong, and that in fact UD is the way to go?

Er... ...that's 'Unintelligent Design', as I'm certain you all guessed. I'm sure Douglas Adams had some comments on a species which was searching for the Supreme Being just so they could give Him a piece of their mind...

Bob Shaw