Intelligent Design and Evolution?

The coexistence of these opposing views of where we come from is based on a simple set of ideas, or principles First, that the building blocks of life were created in the manner that the current scientific community acknowledges and accepts, that life evolved on the planet over millennia. Second that these building blocks were at some point in time and in some manner altered by a higher intelligence than knowingly exists on the planet today. Third, that this neither proves nor disproves the existence of God(ess)(s)(esses) or even of extraterrestrial life.

What it does say is that the building blocks existed and were then altered. Period.

Such an idea still leaves open the debate about who created it all. As well as the debate as to whether or not there exists extraterrestrial, or terrestrial forms of higher intelligence.


[edit on 3-4-2009 by Animal]

Every time I see one of these debates on evolution versus intelligent design, I get this image of two little boys arguing whether or not they should invite Superman or Spiderman home for dinner. Based on their world view, it is an incredibly important question, one that must be argued passionately with each boy pointing out the foolishness of the other's claims. And, if they are unable to resolve the debate, the matter can be decided by a good old rolling around in the mud brawl.

An adult, watching these two little boys would recognize the utter pointlessness of the debate because from their world view, they understand the underlying misconceptions and erroneous beliefs held by the boys that they cling to in order to make sense of the world around them. One of the most difficult things that we can do as part of our own personal evolution is step outside our cherished and beloved beliefs and take a look at the world and universe around us as it is, not as we would like it to be. That may involve the very painful and difficult step of actually listening to people who have other points of view.

Often we discover that these simple polarizing debates which we have put into into a dichotomy of us-right-good versus them-bad-wrong, have multiple points of view that invalidate the whole of each of the two polar camps.

For example, just a quick look around at some of the other options in the evolution/creationist debate one finds:

1.The notion that evolution is a mechanism but does not work by random selection. Some recent work suggests that a more Lamarckian model might be accurate where we actually rewrite our DNA in response to our beliefs about the environment.

2.There are organizing principles, like Rupert Sheldrake's morphogenetic fields that we have not yet been able to measure directly that direct evolution based on a templates that represent a the accumulated experience of a species as a whole.

3.Interesting models of evolution based on the study of on linear systems, catastrophe theory (not the popular conspiracy theory but the branch of differential geometry)

4.The notion that consciousness (not god in the monotheistic sense) is in fact a mechanism by which an infinitely dimensional wave function is collapsed into a particular form – a point of view expressed by many religions when they talk about “reality” being an illusion and a dream.

And within the scientific community, there is a diversity of opinion on what even constitutes evolution.

But what is even more amazing, at least to me, is that we have only begun to scratch the surface of understanding the incredible complexity and dynamics that are life. To hear people claim that they have all the answers to the mysteries of life and creation does make me think of those two little boys and their encyclopedic knowledge of superheros.

My point of view which I find myself expressing more and more as I get older is just “Wow!” And I wish I could live for a thousand years just to have enough time to appreciate it all.

Originally posted by metamagic
Every time I see one of these debates on evolution versus intelligent design, I get this image of two little boys arguing whether or not they should invite Superman or Spiderman home for dinner. Based on their world view, it is an incredibly important question, one that must be argued passionately with each boy pointing out the foolishness of the other's claims. And, if they are unable to resolve the debate, the matter can be decided by a good old rolling around in the mud brawl.

This is my first time posting under this topic so I am not quite sure why you ae saying the above to me?

Also I am actually presenting the idea that BOTH sides could potentially be correct, at least to some degree. THAT is what I brought to the table to discuss, the idea that they SIMULTANEOUSLY exist. What do you have ot say to that idea, the idea being presented here for discussion?

An adult, watching these two little boys would recognize the utter pointlessness of the debate because from their world view, they understand the underlying misconceptions and erroneous beliefs held by the boys that they cling to in order to make sense of the world around them. One of the most difficult things that we can do as part of our own personal evolution is step outside our cherished and beloved beliefs and take a look at the world and universe around us as it is, not as we would like it to be. That may involve the very painful and difficult step of actually listening to people who have other points of view.

This is exactly what I am trying to do here, care to play along?

Often we discover that these simple polarizing debates which we have put into into a dichotomy of us-right-good versus them-bad-wrong, have multiple points of view that invalidate the whole of each of the two polar camps.

This is NOT a polarizing debate mate, just a friendly go around with a fairly simple idea merging the two sides to some degree....

For example, just a quick look around at some of the other options in the evolution/creationist debate one finds:

1.The notion that evolution is a mechanism but does not work by random selection. Some recent work suggests that a more Lamarckian model might be accurate where we actually rewrite our DNA in response to our beliefs about the environment.

2.There are organizing principles, like Rupert Sheldrake's morphogenetic fields that we have not yet been able to measure directly that direct evolution based on a templates that represent a the accumulated experience of a species as a whole.

3.Interesting models of evolution based on the study of on linear systems, catastrophe theory (not the popular conspiracy theory but the branch of differential geometry)

4.The notion that consciousness (not god in the monotheistic sense) is in fact a mechanism by which an infinitely dimensional wave function is collapsed into a particular form – a point of view expressed by many religions when they talk about “reality” being an illusion and a dream.

And within the scientific community, there is a diversity of opinion on what even constitutes evolution.

But what is even more amazing, at least to me, is that we have only begun to scratch the surface of understanding the incredible complexity and dynamics that are life. To hear people claim that they have all the answers to the mysteries of life and creation does make me think of those two little boys and their encyclopedic knowledge of superheros.

Cool information, now what do you think about the idea I presented?

My point of view which I find myself expressing more and more as I get older is just “Wow!” And I wish I could live for a thousand years just to have enough time to appreciate it all.

Super dooper! Any comments on the IDEA I presented in the Opening Post?