Intelligently Designed but Is it Divine?

IMO
(I refer specifically to the intelligence responsible for the physical world and all within)

It is obvious to many that the physical world we inhabit is intelligently designed. A high degree of order and predictability is self evident when one observes the world around them.

This high degree of order and predictability is unfortunately accompanied by a high degree of suffering. This is also self evident when one observes the world around them.

If the intelligent designer of this world also designed the mechanisms (principally emotions and physical pain) and environments to facilitate suffering(which appears to be the case) on such a huge scale then what are we to make of our worlds illustrious designer?

Could He/She correctly be thought of as a compassionate, fair, just, loving, benign, good and divine designer/creator?


[edit on 22-3-2006 by point]

It is not obvious that the world is intelligently designed. It is obvious that a human being can look at the world and *consider* it to be ordered, complex, beautiful, grand etc

If suffering is deliberate, then it is either evil or utterly arbitrary. Since the "Intelligent Designer" would never act randomly then it is evil.

Thinking the universe is designed by an entity who governs by human concepts is incredibly pompous in my opinion. Science rightly never claims to be the final answer, just an endless unfolding of knowledge, always wary of its own incompleteness. Religious concepts always talk of knowing ultimate truth and acting accordingly.

He/she/it is not compasionate, fair, just, loving, benign, good and divine because these are human traits which compared to the awesome power of the universe are insignificant.

Originally posted by point
If the intelligent designer of this world also designed the mechanisms (principally emotions and physical pain) and environments to facilitate suffering(which appears to be the case) on such a huge scale then what are we to make of our worlds illustrious designer?

I lean more towards the idea that the 'intelligent designer' created us with choice, and it is our choices which lead to 'suffering'. Our suffering is created from within.

originally posted by glastonaut
It is not obvious that the world is intelligently designed. It is obvious that a human being can look at the world and *consider* it to be ordered, complex, beautiful, grand etc

If suffering is deliberate, then it is either evil or utterly arbitrary. Since the "Intelligent Designer" would never act randomly then it is evil.

I agree that it's every bit as likely that the world APPEARS ordered, as it is that it was created ordered.

However, I disagree that an 'intelligent designer' wouldn't act randomly. Why not? I listen to playlists on shuffle all the time. Maybe the 'intelligent designer' likes to be surprised, just as we do.

I don't think suffering is Deliberate. It wouldn't be the 'intelligent designers' goal to MAKE us suffer, but the possibility of suffering exists, as a result of choices and decisions we may make. It exists as a tool to teach us about ourselves, and to learn and grow from.

Originally posted by quango
However, I disagree that an 'intelligent designer' wouldn't act randomly. Why not? I listen to playlists on shuffle all the time. Maybe the 'intelligent designer' likes to be surprised, just as we do.

But isn't the order that appears to permeate the universe one of the principle arguments in favour of ID? There is scant little evidence as it is, but I don't know how ID can be argued from the standpoint of considering the order AND chaos in the universe.

Originally posted by quango
I don't think suffering is Deliberate. It wouldn't be the 'intelligent designers' goal to MAKE us suffer, but the possibility of suffering exists, as a result of choices and decisions we may make. It exists as a tool to teach us about ourselves, and to learn and grow from.

You could be right there, but then considering this i fail to see the role of the intelligent designer here. If he sets up the environment for suffering to take place how can "he/she/it" not be responsible? The possibility for suffering exists because "he/she/it" set it up that way. If it is arbitrary, or down to choice, then no designer is necessary, and we should look to the solution to our problems with our fellow human beings and not to unprovable, detatched entities.

Originally posted by glastonaut
But isn't the order that appears to permeate the universe one of the principle arguments in favour of ID? There is scant little evidence as it is, but I don't know how ID can be argued from the standpoint of considering the order AND chaos in the universe.

I picture it like this - ID creates the rules and laws governing everything. But the details are random.

Take our solar system as an example. The rules and laws determine how all the planets and moons and comets interact with one another. (gravity, orbits, etc.), but the makeup of our solar system is random. There are nine planets rather than sixteen rather than five.

The placement of the matter throughout the universe is random. The way it will interact and behave is intelligently designed.

That's just what I see.

You could be right there, but then considering this i fail to see the role of the intelligent designer here. If he sets up the environment for suffering to take place how can "he/she/it" not be responsible? The possibility for suffering exists because "he/she/it" set it up that way. If it is arbitrary, or down to choice, then no designer is necessary, and we should look to the solution to our problems with our fellow human beings and not to unprovable, detatched entities.

I agree - this idea would assume that the ID is looking out for us and trying to help with our growth. It's possible, but I do agree with you said - we should look to solve our problems with our fellow humans. Whether an ID is trying to guide us or not, we (as in humanity) are in control of how we act towards one another.

Originally posted by glastonaut
It is not obvious that the world is intelligently designed. It is obvious that a human being can look at the world and *consider* it to be ordered, complex, beautiful, grand etc

If suffering is deliberate, then it is either evil or utterly arbitrary. Since the "Intelligent Designer" would never act randomly then it is evil.

Thinking the universe is designed by an entity who governs by human concepts is incredibly pompous in my opinion. Science rightly never claims to be the final answer, just an endless unfolding of knowledge, always wary of its own incompleteness. Religious concepts always talk of knowing ultimate truth and acting accordingly.

He/she/it is not compasionate, fair, just, loving, benign, good and divine because these are human traits which compared to the awesome power of the universe are insignificant.

'IMO' and "It is obvious to 'many' ", I believe I wrote. Not including you, obviously.
It is incredibly pompous to claim to know anothers opinion better than they do themselves.
Waving the flag of the 'white coat brigade' is no different to waving the bible around claiming you have the truth. Both avenues are flawed in my opinion.
You seem to know the I.D. never acts randomly. Are you the I.D.?
Who do you think designed these 'insignificant human traits', these 'human concepts'?

[edit on 23-3-2006 by point]

To add to the random argument, many outcomes are unknown with almost all things designed by humans, thus why should the Universe be any different?

Originally posted by mytym
To add to the random argument, many outcomes are unknown with almost all things designed by humans, thus why should the Universe be any different?

Actually, physical process' are technically not random. Including the solar system. Everything follows very basic 'laws' that allow thing's to function the way they do. Hydrogen and Oxygen will always make water. A star's gravity will always keep a planet in orbit a certain speed/distance. Mass of a certain 'weight' will always attract more mass. Life, given the right condition will always come to be. Be it primitive or highly evolved. You don't find life on the surface of a star due to the conditions for life being non existant there. You don't find life on pluto due to the conditions not being existant there.

If all thing's once defined as random or supernatural as defined by uneducated primitive humans have been proven to not be random, nor supernatural, why should the universe be any different?

Originally posted by point
'IMO' and "It is obvious to 'many' ", I believe I wrote. Not including you, obviously.
It is incredibly pompous to claim to know anothers opinion better than they do themselves.
Waving the flag of the 'white coat brigade' is no different to waving the bible around claiming you have the truth. Both avenues are flawed in my opinion.

No, one is flawed by its assumption it is the truth, the other is always conscious of its own limitations, so it is always open to ALL the possibilities that may exist. Guess which one?


Again, I ask the question. What gains do you get by rejecting other possibilities and only following one that we hold to be 'obvious' without evidence? Since this is a matter of faith any answer you give will be correct, but it may shed light on the thought process you went through to reach such a conclusion.

I don't know if intelligent design is behind all this or not. I must confess, the notion of ID is rather fascinating to me, even though all my past years of schooling (brain washing) scream at me to reject ID as lacking in substance and without a rigorous scientific foundation.

The whole idea of "intelligence" has always been a little vague to me. Cough, cough ... It's subjective and open to interpretation. While we may fancy ourselves as infinitely more advanced than the cattle we breed, an alien "intelligence" may see us as indistinguishable, and find our value only in what we add to the soup at dinner time.

I think what I'm getting at is that if there was an intelligence behind our creation, it may be that our contribution to it was so small as to go completely unnoticed. Or even worse, what if our "Creator" has long since kicked the bucket, leaving us here all alone like poor, lost, little lambs in the middle of a deep, dark, wolf-infested forest?

Hmmm ... Who knows? It is fascinating, though.

[edit on 3/23/2006 by netbound]

Prot0n:
Further proof of intelligent design wouldn't you say? Seeing as how it was stated that an intelligent designer would never act randomly (according to a previous poster). This is what I was originally responding to.

By the way, you seem very familiar. You wouldn't be a recently banned former member, would you?

We are a long ways from finding proof of an intelligent designer, in fact there is no solid proof that we can say "look there it is, making everything that is." However, that is not to say that we can not rule out the possibility that there is indeed a greater intelligence, it is the implications that we have to look at, like complexity and how many of natures creations/systems are irreducibley complex, as well as DNA the genetic blue print for all life forms, in order for information to be created it has to have a programmer, it is illogical to suppose that it randomly came together. The universe is to fine tuned to discredit this theory hopefully with a combination of science and metaphysics some day we can solve this question and all get on with our lives

2nd mundaka-That immortal Brahman alone is before, that Brahman is behind, that Brahman is to the right and left. Brahman alone pervades everything above and below; this universe is that Supreme Brahman alone.

For further reading in the topic of ID ide suggest reading Darwins black box by mikey behe

Point:

good points

consider this, what if the body didn't matter at all. For example your time here was only to gain experience and knowledge for the greater good of all existance.

What if suffering existed to counterbalance pleasure and gain that you had enjoyed before (I'm talking about re-incarnation here).

What if you were only a spirit that animated intelligently designed vessels like bodies and you cycled in and out of them.

The spirit is everything and it is considered nothing by many whilst in the flesh.

Originally posted by denythestatusquo

What if you were only a spirit that animated intelligently designed vessels like bodies and you cycled in and out of them.

The spirit is everything and it is considered nothing by many whilst in the flesh.

I agree,
I made a point that I was refering specifically to the physical world in the OP precisely for the reason that I believe there is far more in existence than the physical. I was trying to keep it simple.
There may be a far more greater I.D. or I.C. that designed/created things far more important than the physical who may also be in opposition to the I.D. of the physical and share qualities that I mention in the O.P.
To put it simply, more than one Intelligent designer.

Further proof of intelligent design wouldn't you say? Seeing as how it was stated that an intelligent designer would never act randomly (according to a previous poster). This is what I was originally responding to.

Not necessarily. It just means the way thing's are is they way they are. There's nothing indicative to say that the designer would not act randomly. Even with our more highly developed mind, we still act randomly. There's no underlying 'law' forcing human being's to act in an orderly fashion and one man (or woman) can and some have, just lash out and kill someone for no reason. Randomly.

By the way, you seem very familiar. You wouldn't be a recently banned former member, would you?

Um, no? I registered just a few days ago I think.

Wouldn't human actions constitute physical processes? After all our thoughts are generated from the physical processes of electrical discharges from neurons in our brains, or so I'm led to believe.

Originally posted by mytym
Wouldn't human actions constitute physical processes? After all our thoughts are generated from the physical processes of electrical discharges from neurons in our brains, or so I'm led to believe.

Well, yes. The 'laws' governing thought process or instinctual response aren't as well known. The brain is a highly advanced organ. In fact, there are two brain's in the human body, the second one was discovered no that long ago in the stomach area. It is true, electrical discharge's are part of 'thinking', but there's also the chemcal nature that play's a role in this as well. A certain increase in certain hormone's can give rise to certain thought's and action's. It's not 'energy' alone that allow's us to think.

www.aikidoaus.com.au...

Originally posted by Prot0n

Not necessarily. It just means the way thing's are is they way they are. There's nothing indicative to say that the designer would not act randomly. Even with our more highly developed mind, we still act randomly. There's no underlying 'law' forcing human being's to act in an orderly fashion and one man (or woman) can and some have, just lash out and kill someone for no reason. Randomly.

Personally, I think there is always a reason someone would lash out and kill someone.
It may appear random and inexplicable to others, there maybe no apparent premeditation but at some point there would be a triggering event prior to the action like a thought, a memory even a 'Manchurian Candidate' like activating trigger.
A person labeled insane would still have needed some sort of initiating process in the brain before the act even for a split second.

Then again a temporary possession of a persons body by an outside agent of some sort could do the trick. The person could be aware of what's going on but unable to resist the over riding force.
It may appear far fetched to some but it is still a reason.

[edit on 24-3-2006 by point]

In some cases the reason would be something wrong within the brain. The wiring could be messed up or hormone imbalances. Even I get POed sometime's and act in a violent manner as a result, but not once have I thought this was due to a demon possesion. That sounds like a cop out to me, a way of writing off your own actions. I'm not sure if that would hold up in a court of law.

I don't think a court of law is the ideal yardstick to determine fact from fiction. You're entitled to your own opinion, but so is everyone else.