If it was designed, was it really all that "intelligent"?

[Ouroboros]

Humans have had to develop so many technological fixes for poor design.

I mean, consider. . .

Interesting angle. If the design was so intelligent, then why is it so intensely complicated and near impossible to create medicine that works once and for all and for all situations and for everyone?

 

[George-ananda]

If we are designed, the designer is anything but intelligent.

Tyson makes the same common assumptions as the OP which I think are wrong; That for there to be intelligence in the design of life and the universe it would be for the purpose of human beings physical comfort and survival. I believe there is intelligence at work in life and the universe but it is of such a grander scope than what we can fully envision. The human struggle is a tiny, tiny part of the design. And even the fact that it is a struggle is part of this grander design.

Tyson is arguing against those who just take one step beyond Biblical Genesis reasoning; those trying to keep science and Genesis. His argument does not apply to those who have taken multiple steps beyond Biblical Genesis.

 

[Marisa]

Tyson is arguing against those who just take one step beyond Biblical Genesis reasoning; those trying to keep science and Genesis. His argument does not apply to those who have taken multiple steps beyond Biblical Genesis.

I don't have much argument with your first paragraph. I don't necessarily agree, but I don't intend to argue with your perspective on "why it all is".

But the part I quoted, you have to understand what Tyson is arguing against. He's arguing against people who believe the bible is an accurate description of the only god that has ever and will ever exist, and that the Genesis account is the way he created life. These people are immensely powerful here in the US and have stood on the brink of "taking over" public school science and history classrooms. These people are elected into public office and have extensive influence in driving US policy. Tyson has no conflict with the religious in general, the "liberal religious" who don't see science as conflicting with their beliefs and has only recently been known to speak as the atheist he most likely is (he won't call himself that). His problem is this:

Paul Broun - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[George-ananda]

I don't have much argument with your first paragraph. I don't necessarily agree, but I don't intend to argue with your perspective on "why it all is".

But the part I quoted, you have to understand what Tyson is arguing against. He's arguing against people who believe the bible is an accurate description of the only god that has ever and will ever exist, and that the Genesis account is the way he created life. These people are immensely powerful here in the US and have stood on the brink of "taking over" public school science and history classrooms. These people are elected into public office and have extensive influence in driving US policy. Tyson has to conflict with the religious in general, the "liberal religious" who don't see science as conflicting with their beliefs and has only recently been known to speak as the atheist he most likely is (he won't call himself that). His problem is this:

I understand your point. But there are also some of us that are into this discussion for the purpose of understanding the universe better (not stopping a religious/political movement).

 

[Kuzcotopia]

Interesting angle. If the design was so intelligent, then why is it so intensely complicated and near impossible to create medicine that works once and for all and for all situations and for everyone?

I guess if we were a singular organism where cells were essentially stable and there wasn't such a genetic and environmental diversity among humans, it might be easier. An intelligent designer might have considered that to help us out a little.

Cancer is an especially tough problem, because medicine can't find any real global links between what causes it and how it grows. As a mutated cell, each cancer is essentially a unique disease for each person.

We are inadvertently developing antibiotic resistant strains of bacteria because things are constantly changing and evolving.

Plus, there's still so much we just don't know. Maybe one day, but life is just so darn random to give me hope that we can ever truly pin everything down like we did with specific diseases like Smallpox and Polio.

 

[Marisa]

I understand your point. But there are also some of us that are into this discussion for the purpose of understanding the universe better (not stopping a religious/political movement).

Well I understand that, and I commented with the video more because it expresses my opinion that to stop a political movement.

 

[Ouroboros]

Plus, there's still so much we just don't know. Maybe one day, but life is just so darn random to give me hope that we can ever truly pin everything down like we did with specific diseases like Smallpox and Polio.

Honestly, my feeling is that we'll see that its infinitely complex and that it's impossible to solve or know everything. I believe there isn't any unified theory. And the same goes for biology, as you point out, it's all changing. It's like pinning down a rabbit in flight.

 

[viole]

What about the dinosaurs? Did God at some point say "oops" and decide that all those dinosaurs gotta go?

I guess His kid refused to incarnate as a velociraptor. I mean, who would want that? Apes are so much cuter

Or maybe He did not want M. Gibson to be the director of Jurassic Park. Who knows?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Ouroboros]

I guess His kid refused to incarnate as a velociraptor. I mean, who would want that? Apes are so much cuter

Or maybe He did not want M. Gibson to be the director of Jurassic Park. Who knows?

Ciao

- viole

Imagine if the roles were reversed.

A lizard looking Spielberg directing a Jurassic Park movie with a giant, dino-eating... human!!! Rhaaarrr!!!

LOL!

 

[Skwim]

I've noticed while reading this section that a lot of arguments seem to be based in the idea that life on this planet is so complex and improbable that it is believed that the only logical conclusion is that it must have been created by some intelligent being.

But then I have to wonder about all the species which have gone extinct. Were these screw ups?

What about the dinosaurs? Did God at some point say "oops" and decide that all those dinosaurs gotta go?

If it's an "intelligent design," does it mean that it's more of an "experimental" design with a lot of trial and error? Even if we assume that the "designer" is actively interfering and micromanaging that process, wouldn't that still imply evolution on some level?

​

__________________________________________________________________

So because, to the untrained eye, it's not immediately apparent how such complex life forms developed, magic poofing by an invisible sky spirit seems the only reasonable explanation?

Actually, it's more than the untrained eye. It's deliberate ignorance; more on the order of necessary rejection.

 

[Stevicus]

I guess His kid refused to incarnate as a velociraptor. I mean, who would want that? Apes are so much cuter

Or maybe He did not want M. Gibson to be the director of Jurassic Park. Who knows?

Ciao

- viole

I wonder if it had something to do with Godzilla. Although Godzuki was kind of cute.

 

[Koldo]

Only if you like food that's tasteless, colorless, and bland.

...granted that analogy is kinda broken because I generally prefer bland foods to heavily flavored ones, but still... then again I think that's my overall lack of Japanese food.

Are those spirits... edible?
I guess that explains why it is so hard to find them. They must taste really good.

 

[Riverwolf]

Are those spirits... edible?
I guess that explains why it is so hard to find them. They must taste really good.

Well, considering the ubiquitousness of Deer Gods...

 

[Koldo]

Because I believe they exist from the psychic insight of many individuals who I have come to respect. It is not a concept I am inventing myself.

I seriously suggest you reconsider how you process the information you get from them.
This is not the first time I have come across you saying something along those lines, and it feels incredibly similar to: "It is true because my mommy said so.".
I don't mean it as offense, but it seems like you stop thinking critically ( in other words, thinking by yourself ) after you choose your teachers.
The fact that someone often says something that I agree with doesn't mean that I should accept everything that comes out of their mouth. Actually, the more I want something to be the case, the more I want something to be the truth, the more I should be skeptical about it. It is all too easy to fall in intellectual traps that hinder our progress towards a better understanding of the world.

 

[Koldo]

Well, considering the ubiquitousness of Deer Gods...

There isn't any Deer God around here that I am aware of.
Oh crap.... People must have eaten them all before we even had legends about them...

 

[George-ananda]

I seriously suggest you reconsider how you process the information you get from them.
This is not the first time I have come across you saying something along those lines, and it feels incredibly similar to: "It is true because my mommy said so.".
I don't mean it as offense, but it seems like you stop thinking critically ( in other words, thinking by yourself ) after you choose your teachers.

Why does it mean I didn't use critical thinking to come to the belief that certain spiritual teachers have valuable things to share. I critically consider things like consistency with things I can observe; other wisdom traditions; the evidence that some can perceive things beyond the physical, etc. etc.. That is critical thinking. For example, I objectively believe there are dramatic things beyond the known physical from my experiences and studies.

The fact that someone often says something that I agree with doesn't mean that I should accept everything that comes out of their mouth.

I agree and I don't do that either. But I bet there are people whose opinions you respect more than others.

Actually, the more I want something to be the case, the more I want something to be the truth, the more I should be skeptical about it.

Correct, I feel I reached my opinions through objective reasoning. I was aware of the tendency to favor what you want to hear and it did increase my skepticism. Skepticism is a questioning what you hear not rejecting everything without perfect proof. In an objective analysis you have to put preferences aside. Because something is subjectively better does not mean it can not also be objectively the most reasonable position

It is all too easy to fall in intellectual traps that hinder our progress towards a better understanding of the world.

I understand that and do due diligence. It is also possible to do objective analysis putting any personal feelings aside.

Using your argument one can never objectively conclude something positive about the universe (because any positive conclusions would be subjective bias). Only negative conclusions can be objective by your reasoning.

 

[Thief]

Yes, it's examples of bad design. This kind of spaghetti code can be seen in nature, so it really reminds more of spaghetti code or trial-and-error or hack coding (mickey-mouse code) or whatever we want to call it more than intelligent.

Coincidentally.....the 'spaghetti' cooks quite well and has been doing so for a long time.

The 'fault' isn't really a 'fault'.
Just part of the scheme of things.

 

[George-ananda]

I seriously suggest you reconsider how you process the information you get from them.
This is not the first time I have come across you saying something along those lines, and it feels incredibly similar to: "It is true because my mommy said so.".
I don't mean it as offense, but it seems like you stop thinking critically ( in other words, thinking by yourself ) after you choose your teachers.
The fact that someone often says something that I agree with doesn't mean that I should accept everything that comes out of their mouth. Actually, the more I want something to be the case, the more I want something to be the truth, the more I should be skeptical about it. It is all too easy to fall in intellectual traps that hinder our progress towards a better understanding of the world.

And I wish to add in addition to my last reply.....

I believe the bias is more often in the opposite direction; that many people have developed an emotional dislike to anything that smacks of God, spirituality or the paranormal. I find an emotional resistance in many people (not a logical consideration). They will jump immediately to a negative position.

 

[Riverwolf]

There isn't any Deer God around here that I am aware of.
Oh crap.... People must have eaten them all before we even had legends about them...

Perhaps...

OR MAYBE THEY'RE JUST INVISIBLE!!! (and pink, of course, because things can still have color when invisible, right? lol)

 

[Unification]

I've noticed while reading this section that a lot of arguments seem to be based in the idea that life on this planet is so complex and improbable that it is believed that the only logical conclusion is that it must have been created by some intelligent being.

But then I have to wonder about all the species which have gone extinct. Were these screw ups?

What about the dinosaurs? Did God at some point say "oops" and decide that all those dinosaurs gotta go?

If it's an "intelligent design," does it mean that it's more of an "experimental" design with a lot of trial and error? Even if we assume that the "designer" is actively interfering and micromanaging that process, wouldn't that still imply evolution on some level?

Evolution cycle:

We swam and crawled on this earth for a lot longer than we have walked on it. We were on the exact same earth we are on now. We looked up at the same sky and saw the same moon, sun and stars. The only difference is we were living in a different type of body. We evolved from them, so the odds are we were them.

Just as you are looking out of human eyes now, you looked out of the eyes of a dinosaur. Life looked the same, the only real difference is that you were looking from a different body. You should imagine what living in other bodies was like.

When the dinosaurs went extinct, we went extinct as dinosaurs.

Soul migration: Just as energy cannot be created or destroyed, it is the same with life. When one life form or species goes extinct, another fills the void, and the soul (you) goes from body to body, species to species, reptile to mammal, etc.