Is Intelligent Design Really Intelligent? A paper I had to do for english

I was given the opportunity to do a paper in my English class on Intelligent Design. I only had 2 1/2 hours to write it and this is what I came up with. I had very limited use of the internet and it was NOT a research paper. The professor is (I think) Christian and knows that I am an Atheist. She was very excited to read my paper. I am posting it here because I would like feed back on the arguments I presented. I told her without proper research my ideas might have a few holes in them and she understood completely, again this was for an English paper.

 

Any help on the ideas I presented would be greatly appreciated :) I hope this is in the right forum.....

 


Is Intelligent Design Really Intelligent?

 

Is life on earth the result of intelligent design or did it all happen by chance? Intelligent design (or ID) is the theory that a superior being put the universe into motion. The majority of people who believe in intelligent design also believe it goes further than that, that God has a hand in our every day life. A smaller percentage believe that we are here due to evolution, that everything happened by chance. From my point of view Chance seems more logical. The ideology of Intelligent design does not justify birth defects; it can not be proven in the science lab; and is not an adequate argument for “gaps” in science.

 

A disturbing problem with the theory of Intelligent design is the overwhelming amount of birth defects, both structural and functional/developmental. Birth defects are caused by defects in our genes as well as environmental hazards. Intelligent design, with the accompanying belief in God, is that humans should be perfect. We were made by God in his image. Perfect. If that were true then our genetic code would not mutate. Hence there would be no birth defects and/or genetic mutations/mishaps. This however is not the case. The Center for Disease Control states that 120,000 babies in the United States are born with birth defects each year. If you look at this situation through the scope of evolution you will see that mutations in genetic code fit very well into the science of evolution.

The way our species has evolved over time has brought us to become a science dependant race. Everything from understanding our place in the solar system, to the atoms and molecules that make up our bodies, to the types of foods we can safely ingest, we got from scientifically testing theories, which is the reason we have the answers to those questions. Intelligent design is not a probable or acceptable theory due to lack of being able to test it which is why the scientific community does not recognize it.

There are some who view science as a great tool of the human race, however they can not let go of the emotion that accompanies Intelligent Design. They see the gaps in science as unexplainable and therefore attribute these unexplainable instances to ID. This is called using the God of Gaps rationalization. Using this argument is not conducive to science because everyday science is understanding more and more about the universe and the world in which we live. At one point in time science thought the earth was flat, but due to exploration, we came to the conclusion that the earth was in fact round. This is the way that science works.

 

Intelligent design, as fascinating as it might seem to some, is not a theory of scientific measures at this point in time. It simply plays on the emotions, as opposed to the intellect, of humans. So in the words of Christopher Hitchens I leave you with this “Exceptional claims demand exceptional evidence.", and Intelligent Design does not give exceptional evidence.

Tags: College, Design, ID, Intelligent, course, work

Views: 185

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Actually, I did get your point about us being 'rich' figuratively. I mentioned that briefly and even agreed with you...

It is true that many have a much harder road to travel. But there are always ways to pull one's self at least slightly ahead. Maybe not in regards to status, but proper education can do wonders for a persons self esteem and worth. They may not gain physical riches, but they may gain the means to make more of what they do have. Shedding iron age superstition could allow them to make better of their situation or give them an understanding or point of view that bay give them a more positive view on life. Of course every situation is different. But isn't it better for the man on the street to realize that although their life may not be easy, it is still a wonderful 'gift'. Rather than living in constant worry that their poor life conditions are due to being punished by their god.

I find it profoundly sad that theists can think that life without a god is meaningless or that there can be no good without a god. Religion has no monopoly on morals... far from it. Anyone that has read the Bible can easily see that the doctrine is full of many horrors and absurdity. We are all obviously capable of good and bad. You, me , the next person we meet... none of us are perfect. You think that some truth has been lost on all of us. But your 'truth' is far from the truth. There is no evidence to show that godless societies are any less good. In fact, research has shown that the least religious countries tend to have lower crime statistics. Or maybe you're saying that even though we are personally good for reasons other than a god, we still somehow channel that ability for him without our knowledge... The latter is nothing more than an unfounded assertion. Anyone could claim any trait is the doing of any entity or person by that line of 'thinking'. You may think that is the case, but can you show it to be so? What if someone else claims that all goodness flows from Vishnu? Neither of you have any proof to show such is the case. Yet we can look at history and see that some aspects of morality have changed through the years, while others have remained constant. Morality based off of a logical reflection, and empathy is both feasible, fits the historical record and works. Sadly, there are otherwise good people who will do wrong in the name of religion. I'm sure we can both agree that this is a terrible truth. But I must ask you this... If you say that without a god there is no goodness, then if you were mad enough at someone that you wished they were dead, would the lack of that god mean that nothing would stop you from shooting them dead on the spot? You think that the world is greater for Jesus, but I feel it is the inverse since faith tells us to be satisfied with not knowing.

[...] Another argument we have heard quite often. But this has a reply that anyone can understand. "Just because you want something, doesn't mean it's true." You may want to win the lottery... but wishing for it won't make it happen. If your child has a terminal case of cancer, you can pray until you're blue in the face but that won't change her fate. When you first realize God isn't there and that praying is basically the same thing as throwing pennies into a wishing well or spitting between your fingers when you see a meteor, you feel alone and afraid. I first came here as a newborn deconvert. Frightened, vulnerable and confused and with the support of the people on this network I have managed to realize that I was never alone. The people around me are my companions and I don't need a God to cling to like a frightened child when life goes wrong.

Your world view denies them this most essential thing.

 

But your worldview denies them everything else.  Food, sanitary conditions, safety - all things an omnipotent god could fix - or better yet, "designed" to never have happened.  Hence, the insistence (original topic) that ID be left in the realm of theological study, and leave science to science.

I was about to type something very similar. It probably would have take me more words so thanks for summing it up :)

@ Elizabeth. The main point I am making with my paper is that ID does not give sufficent evidence. PLEASE NOTE the CLOSING :

Intelligent design, as fascinating as it might seem to some, is not a theory of scientific measures at this point in time. It simply plays on the emotions, as opposed to the intellect, of humans. So in the words of Christopher Hitchens I leave you with this “Exceptional claims demand exceptional evidence.", and Intelligent Design does not give exceptional evidence.

WOW That's pretty f'n awesome :D Thanks for posting that :D
That kind of sounds like poetic nonsense to me, I certainly wouldn't tell a third world street child that the only reason they exist is so some elite philosopher can feel good about himself, I'd tell them that there is hope in Jesus and maybe a better life too, then I'd give the food and clothes and follow up as much as possible, you know like missionaries do. Maybe you could become a missionary for atheism. At least the kid would have a full belly if nothing else. And I do mean NOTHING!

ROFLMFAO!! Where did you get that piece of genius! XD

How on earth did you get 'you only exist so a philosopher can feel better about themselves' from those quotes? Admittedly, Nietzsche's is a little flowery, but Marcus' is about as clear as you can get.
Ok I didn't see the Marcus one. But even our best is still not good enough for God, enter Jesus.
If you think God is unjust then I agree with you, if he were, we'd all be fried a long time ago.

lol! I want that hammer!!

 

RSS

Services we love!

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

In need a of a professional web site? Check out the good folks at Clear Space Media

© 2014   Created by umar.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service