2006-09-04 00:52:57 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics ➔ Biology
All of this "Intelligent Designer" stuff is nothing more than a feeble attempt by religious fanatics to come up with some sort of counter-attack to those who expound on the theory of evolution, and its's not a very good attack at that. Evolution at least has a fossil record and scientific evidence to back it up, whereas "Intelligent Design" has nothing except awe of things not understood. When fossils were first discovered all sorts of preposterous theories came up, and Intelligent Design is more like one of those.
2006-09-04 01:00:24 · answer #1 · answered by Kokopelli 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
That's a great question, although I don't think that we'll ever have the brains to understand the answer. It would mean deconstructing the idea of time, as an intelligent designer would also have to exist outside of time, and therefore outside of our comprehension.
On a personal note, I think that it was not created, but evolved as my concept of God is the collective conciousness of the universe. In an eternally recurrent universe, anything is possible and an emanation can indeed become an Intelligent designer after many, thousands of billions of lives of the cosmos. Unfortunately the origin of the emination, I have no idea about, so just can't answer I'm affraid.
Good luck on your search.
To all of you know-all athiests, try explaining what happenned before the big bang!
2006-09-04 08:14:05 · answer #2 · answered by voodoobluesman 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The Earth was not made by "design" intelligent or otherwise The only reason it's called the Theory of Evolution is because no-one has proved it yet When they do it will be called the law of evolution. If the best we can do when we don't understand something is to make up a supernatural answer then maybe we haven't evolved as mush as we think
2006-09-04 08:10:47 · answer #3 · answered by xpatgary 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Evolution is a change from one form to another; if God is eternal and/or outside of time, then change is impossible for God and therefore God cannot be considered to have evolved.
As for intelligence - intelligence is, well, a relative concept.....dogs have intelligence, but they couldn't design anything. We have MORE intelligence than dogs, for example, but - where is the cut off point? A wasp builds a nest, the instructions for which are instinctively encoded in its brain, but this design is NOT intelligent; it is a random pattern of behaviour that, when combined with the environment the wasp lives in and the other creatures in that environment, allows the wasp to survive. It is behaviour that evolved to mimic an intelligence-derived solution; we humans would think about the design before trying it.....wasps tried zillions and died in their zillions before hitting on a pattern that allowed them to survive, and of course as long as their environment stays constant, the pattern is fine....but it is NOT intelligence....
So, 'design' can indeed be considered to be a by-product of random actions as well as of intelligence, so perhaps God creates instinctively, if such biological concepts can be rightly applied in this context.
What about truly 'intelligent' design? Intelligence cannot be built in isolation - mathematics cannot be reduced to a random conglomeration of conjecture; it must correspond to the real world in some way. A computer cannot build a program that doesn't do anything - there must be an interaction with the environment at some level for 'reality' to have any meaning. If you consider reality, i.e. the environment, to be of and in God, then the idea of interaction with the environment to provide the idea of intelligence is meaningless, since God IS the environment AS WELL AS the system itself.
The short answer is.....the jury's out, I'd say - as science evolves, God seems to get pushed into the realm of the uncertain, which seems to many people to recede decade on decade. However, for those engaged in investigation of the physical sciences, each new answer brings more questions. Furthermore, there is a limit to the amount of information we can derive about a system due to the Uncertainy Principle. Also, Godel's incompleteness theorem effectively states that: in order to build a system, ANY system, of knowledge, we must make an assumption(s) which are axiomatic i.e. TAKEN TO BE TRUE, and yet are themselves unprovable.....
Our minds are electrochemical computers.....and I sincerely believe that there are better models elsewhere in the universe.....
2006-09-04 11:40:34 · answer #4 · answered by kreen 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't believe this ID stuff, however you are looking at the question too much from the human perspective (i.e. that if somebody believes there to be a designer, the universe we see requries there to be something that has created the creator). However it might be that such a concept as a creator exists outside of space and time, and that such a queston is irrelevant as our understanding of reality is very much divorced from the actuality of who we are, why we are here and what the universe really is. What we see might only be a very small part of a much bigger whole in which such concepts as an Intelligent Designer do not have any meaning, but our human condition is not developed enough to understand it.
2006-09-04 08:34:40 · answer #5 · answered by Sarah H 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
If hard-line religion is anything to go by then the Designer never evolves, as doesn't anything on Earth, we're all exactly as we were when the Designer made it.
After all, if you're already perfect then what would be the point? Unless one wants to assume the Designer was not perfect... this could go on for some time and produce no answers!
2006-09-04 07:59:08 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋
If the scientists are right and we all evolved from a monkey and it's pretty obvious that were more intelligent than a monkey then the designer who made the monkey could have evolved from something else but at the end of the day we all evolved from something and the designer to WHO? GOD THAT'S WHO. WHY GOD Because it's the easiest answer and the answer to all problems is always the simplest
2006-09-04 08:14:17 · answer #7 · answered by micky_qaqc 1 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I believe God, the intelligent designer, does not have a beginning or an end, but is an element who always was and always will be, kind of difficult for most people to understand.
As for evolution, that might be the method by which God designed everything on this planet, or it might just be a trick devised by satan to confuse us; perhaps he planted loads of fossils for us to find. My money's on the former.
2006-09-04 09:28:26 · answer #8 · answered by xenobyte72 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
In Nordic mythology, the gods emerged spontaneously from condensed dust and fire, which were the original constituents of the universe. This is not so far from the scientific account for the origin of the solar system.
It makes some sense if you believe in the primordial soup theory which gives lightning a key role in the origin of life: one of the key gods was the god of thunder (Thor).
2006-09-04 08:10:05 · answer #9 · answered by helene_thygesen 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The whole point is that this 'Intelligent Designer' as you call it is not alive in a way we understand. God didn't need to come from anywhere. He just is.
Not a christian myself, but I understand where some of their stuff comes from.
2006-09-04 08:49:14 · answer #10 · answered by Steve-Bob 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋