97
   

Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

 
 
spendius
 
  1  
Thu 5 Jul, 2007 12:20 pm
Quote:
Agon (Classical Greek) is the ancient Greek word meaning contest or challenge. It is a formal debate which takes place between two characters, usually with the chorus acting as the judge. The character who speaks second always wins the agon, since the last word is always his.


As you went first wande it follows that you must lose.

Plato opposed the Homeric conception of life, that of the nobility, with the doctrines of the Orphic religion, those of the priesthood, which enjoined askesis or renouncement of wordly pleasures which is something nobles emphatically eschew thus leaving a wake of waste.

The proles in a consumer society can live even better than the nobles of 3000 years ago so one presumes anti-IDers, indulging themselves in a manner which only their economic ordinariness can put limits on, will leave a wake of waste too.

And lo and behold the effect is there to see writ large.

One might even argue that they are anti-IDers for that very reason. Any other reason would require a "belief".

Askesis is definitely not something advertising, and the writings of those supported by advertising, is likely to encourage, as your many quotes from such sources provide evidence for.

And Gothic Scholasticism, askesis driven, produced the meditations of Descartes and Leibniz and most of the other great scientists in the claustral cloisters of the intellectual universities of the Baroque. It is only in modern times that Oxbridge scholars are not required to be celibate.

One wonders what the legacy of the nobles would have been had it been the only conception of life streaming in our direction. And one wonders what the legacy of anti-IDers will be if their conception of life is the only one to be streaming towards their own descendents.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Thu 5 Jul, 2007 07:52 pm
OH LOOK MUM< IVE GOT A BLOODY DEGREE IN PHILOSOPHY< Now, dyeh wish crisps wi that?
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Fri 6 Jul, 2007 04:42 am
Wow!!

fm is now denigrating education and exegesis which is beyond him.

Not much "drudgery and stick-ativness" (was it?) needed to manage a simple thing like that. The philistine fundament when it can't bang its own drum.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Sat 7 Jul, 2007 11:07 am
Oswald Spengler wrote in the chapter entitled Pythagoras, Mohammed, Cromwell-

Quote:
Materialism would not be complete without the need of now and again easing the intellectual tension, by giving way to moods of myth, by performing rites of some sort, or by enjoying with an inward light-heartedness the charms of the irrational, the unnatural, the repulsive, and even, the merely silly.


He then gives examples in Buddism and Hellenism ( the Serapis cult), the goings on surrounding Isis worship in ancient Rome, Chaldean astrology, occultism, theosophism and the arts and craft business. He doesn't seem to have considered aliens.

The idea being that these things are a "pastime". A relaxation. A "let's pretend".

He continues after that with-

Quote:
Everywhere it is just a toying with myths that no one really believes, a tasting of cults that it is hoped might fill the inner void. The real belief is always the belief in atoms and numbers, but it requires this highbrow hocus-pocus to make it bearable in the long run. Materialism is shallow and honest, mock-religion shallow and dishonest. But the fact that the latter is possible at all foreshadows a new and genuine spirit of seeking that declares itself, first quietly, but soon emphatically and openly, in the civilized waking-consciousness.


The scientific undermining of Creationism is neither here nor there in the face of such forces and one presumes the ID movement is the beginning of the response and which can only be discredited by asserting that it is Creationism in another guise. A snake-oil sales technique.

Of course one could argue that the first statement quoted here is an assertion but it is backed up by the folk wisdom that man does not live by bread alone and that all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. One could assert the opposite and say that the materialist does not need to ease the intellectual tension and that his "playfulness" could seek an outlet in forms of control freakery based on him having worked out from first principles, scientifically, what everybody should think and do. That is a serious business though and has the expected effect upon his general personality. He frowns a lot and looks at one over his threatening spectacles as if one was a worm.

When the Temple of Isis was opened and closed at regular intervals depending on the problems created by the intellectual tensions not being eased, a real problem for the daughters of the Goddess in their earthly manifestations, and those created by the disgraceful scenes of self-indulgent debauchery, which I will forbear providing details of, when the intellectual tensions were eased, it provided empirical evidence that these two forces which Spengler draws attention to present a real and felt opposition in human social life of the developed type which the leadership must address. (The Temple of Mars, who was traditionally born of the virgin Juno, was always open.)

A pale shadow of the situation in Rome, where they were a bit up front about things, can be seen in our religious festivals and other spiritual events such as Thanksgiving and July 4 and even on weekends. This shadow or dim echo of the past is faint enough to be congruent with the intellectual tensions in Western civilisation under the influence of American ideas and which a visit to a mall is usually sufficient for the purpose. (The 7 minute principle).

I might have discovered a scientific law in the social patterns of Megalopolitan man. That the level of intellectual tension is directly proportional to the amount of debauchery required to relieve it and can thus be measured accordingly.

Of course, some people have difficulty with "inward light-heartedness" so they might not understand and if they came to power they would cancel all these reliefs we have won ourselves and have our noses pressed to the grindstone every day, without relief, sustained on rice and water, in order to make the nation great and powerful. (Like as if it isn't now).

But Mr Spengler can have the last word-

Quote:
Every "Age of Enlightenment" proceeds from an unlimited optimism of the reason--always associated with the type of the megalopolitan--to an equally unqualified scepticism. The sovereign waking-consciousness, cut off by walls and artificialities from living nature and the land about it and under it, cognises nothing outside itself. It applies criticism to its imaginary world, (its straw man), which it has cleared of everyday sense experience, and continues to do so till it has found at last the subtlest result, the form of the form, --itself: namely, nothing.
0 Replies
 
wandeljw
 
  1  
Sun 8 Jul, 2007 03:24 pm
Quote:
The 'creation science' myth
(By MARIANNE MEED WARD, Commentary, Sun Media, July 8, 2007)

Here's one from the oxymoron files: Creation science. Get it?

That was my first thought, when I read about two museums opening up -- one in Alberta and one in Kentucky -- to promote the "science" of biblical creation.

The main premise is that evolution is false. God created the Earth and everything in it, in six days, 6,000 years ago, and dinosaurs and humans shared the planet.

I grew up on these stories, and even believed them for a time. That was before I started asking the hard questions. Like, "If Adam and Even were the first people on earth, and Cain and Abel the first offspring, where did the people come from that Cain lived with when he was banished for killing his brother?"

Or like, "What about the mountains of evidence that the world is much, much older than 6,000 years?"

And finally, "Why are Christians reading the creation story as scientific fact?"

The founder of the Alberta museum -- which pales in comparison to the glitzy, $27 million complex in the U.S. -- says both evolution and creation have to be taken on faith, so you pick the faith that fits the facts.

Oxymoron alert number two: If something is factual, you don't need faith. Faith is precisely needed because there is a lack of hard evidence. And the weight of evidence, even for a scientific simpleton like myself, is pretty compelling that evolution has indeed played a part in our development, not only of human life but animal and plant life, too.

I have no problem with the museums as "a tribute to the creation story," and some of the other tales in the Bible. Certainly, the biblical account of creation is colourful and compelling for many reasons. But none of those have to do with science.

My problem with these museums is this: The Bible isn't science, or even reliable history. It is a story, and principle. In many cases, it is allegory, parable, poem and song -- with a hallucination or two thrown in at the end.

But biblical literalists -- as they are called -- can't see the principle for the prose. And that's a shame, because there is much to learn from the principles in the Bible. The conversation gets derailed, however, as we get drawn into debating whether 6,000 or 6,000,000 years is the correct age of the Earth. It's akin to discussing the number of angels that can fit on the head of a pin.

Do the numbers really matter? The U.S.-based Answers in Genesis, which supports creationism, says it does. The organization offers many booklets on its web site including one titled 7 Reasons Why We Should Not Accept Millions of Years. The overarching reason, according to the web site, is this: Accepting an old Earth will do "great damage to the church and her witness in the world."

Notice the key problem isn't about "doing damage to science," which is theoretically what these museums are about. Instead, the church's reputation is at stake, a reputation foolishly staked on a literal, historical reading of the Bible.

The result is a weak, house-of-cards type of faith. The idea is that if you take one card out of the structure, the whole edifice falls. Thus, if the Earth wasn't literally made in six days, then none of the Bible is "true," ergo nothing is of value. This is reductionism at its worst.

I have two problems with this line of thinking. First, faith should be stronger than a house of cards that comes crashing down with every breeze of revelation, or alternatively imprisons its followers in an infantile reduction of key religious themes.

I envision faith more like a web, with strands coming and going as the believer gains more knowledge and insight. This is a strong faith, able to incorporate new information, and even abandon downright kooky notions without throwing out the entire faith.

The "web" believers are also free to focus on the key principles in the Bible: Love your neighbour being the primary one. That edict stands as valuable regardless of the age of the Earth, or whether God or evolution played the bigger part in our creation.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Sun 8 Jul, 2007 04:59 pm
Quote:
Oswald Spengler wrote in the chapter entitled Pythagoras, Mohammed, Cromwell-

Quote:
Materialism would not be complete without the need of now and again easing the intellectual tension, by giving way to moods of myth, by performing rites of some sort, or by enjoying with an inward light-heartedness the charms of the irrational, the unnatural, the repulsive, and even, the merely silly.


The above post is an example of the "merely silly".

What is further on than "merely silly" and shading into "very silly" is the idea that MARIANNE MEED WARD's compositions are fit and proper to be interlarded, juxtaposed even, with the ads for the barbecue gear, the remote control garage doors and the long-life batteries for the electric wheelchairs.

Why is a self confessed "scientific simpleton" being quoted on a Science and Mathematics forum?

Because she used the word "evolution" and that kicks wande into action.

Why is the debate being pursued these days as if one's protaganists didn't exist.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Sun 8 Jul, 2007 05:35 pm
Good stuff there wandel.
Usual stuff there spendi, off subject and totally irrelevant.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Mon 9 Jul, 2007 05:27 am
You never "read" it fm so how would you know?

Evolution and Creationism are off topic. Neither figure in the thread title.

The odd thing is that Science is regularly justified by the social consequences. Why can't religious belief be?

Not that I don't know the answer mind you.

Anyway- both your remarks are assertions and thus worthless. Do you expostulate worthless nostrums all day long?
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Mon 9 Jul, 2007 08:18 am
Actually fm- it's a joke that our viewers come on here to read that "good stuff" as you call it. A function of your underestimation of others.

They have read it all before. Each local newspaper editor might give it house room once a year but wande hunts them all down and gives them to us a lot oftener than that.

You are recommending an article about science and faith written by someone who not only goes by the name Melanie but, to ice the cake so to speak, admits herself to be a "scientific simpleton" which is one of those assertions I am more likely to think has a ring of truth than some others I've seen.

I have already explained how media is on your side. Under the stress of the profit motive of course. They would just as easy switch if they thought it was going to pay better. They are selling flattened out wood pulp with ink inserts and electromagnetic radiations with pulse patterns and not bloody namby-pamby principles. They are businessmen. Do you not know what business is.

The article was predictable, repetitive, boring and badly written twaddle and not to be compared with my recent series of posts or any others I had thought out a bit first and even some of them I hadn't. Probably most.

A scientific mind like mine would put a high degree of probability on the chance of Melanie having being recruited to write for the masses by a process weighted more towards the "who you know" principle that the "what you know" one.

BTW- The number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin has been estimated by a group of scientists who were researching at a disco-dance to be 10 to the power of 26.

Which is a bit like C squared. An act of faith.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Mon 9 Jul, 2007 08:35 am
And our viewers don't come on here to read such things as-

Quote:
Good stuff there wandel.
Usual stuff there spendi, off subject and totally irrelevant.


It's the cyber equivalent of a "hear-hear" at a Rotarian's praise of the activities of Rotarians. In a small town. Threadbare tablecloth and flat beer style.

What would anybody get out of that. Beaming self-reassurance maybe if they are daft enough. Which I'm inclined to think is not the case with our viewers.
0 Replies
 
wandeljw
 
  1  
Mon 9 Jul, 2007 11:29 am
VIRGINIA UPDATE

Quote:
Bible Battle
(Donna C. Gregory, Richmond Observer, July 9, 2007)

After losing the battle to add Intelligent Design to the science curriculum at county schools, several residents are now asking the Chesterfield School Board to consider allowing students to study the Bible as an elective.

"It is my solemn belief that without moral values, our country is on the brink of self-destruction," wrote county resident Kent Weston in a letter to School Board members. "I and so many others out here want you all to know that we support you in making a decision to allow the Bible to be taught objectively and (in a) First Amendment friendly (way) in our public schools. Not only are we asking, but are diligently seeking the means to make it happen."

Mary Blanton, a teacher at Robious Middle School, asked the School Board to consider a curriculum by the Bible Literacy Project, which merges biblical studies with literature, art and other subjects. The curriculum, which is used in 31 states, is constitutionally sound and meets First Amendment requirements, said Blanton.

After the speakers' comments, Bermuda District School Board member Marshall Trammell, Jr. asked Superintendent Marcus Newsome how long it might take to authorize a Bible class as an elective. Newsome responded such a class would require a lot of research to meet federal and state standards; the earliest it could be offered would be fall 2008.

"I'm not advocating that," Trammell said quickly after Newsome's response.

Chairman Tom Doland said offering a Bible class as an elective "can't be done lightly. We follow the guidelines of the state of Virginia. We're not at liberty to just pick whatever we want."

He encouraged the speakers to work with the Virginia Department of Education to seek approval for the Bible Literacy Project curriculum and another by the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools.

"If it comes to us, it has to go through a committee and then back to the state anyway," said Doland.

Doland said he believes it's possible to teach the Bible as an elective in public schools.

"I personally think that's legal," said Doland. "(You) wouldn't have the legal battle of teaching the Bible as a book. That's why you see other states teaching the Bible."

Trammell said he doesn't object to the idea, but added that he felt other religious texts should be included as well.

"I don't believe we can be narrowly focused on one text," said Trammell.

"How do you single out and offer a Bible class and not also offer an elective class in the Koran or other religious classes?" asked Trammell, in comments after the meeting.

He said the end result may not be what the speakers initially had in mind. "I think we understand full well that if you have a Bible class in public schools, it's going to have to be very similar to what you have in college," said Trammell.

He added he believes the general consensus of the board is "the Bible, religion, what-have-you, is best taught at home, in the Sunday school classes and in church, and not in a public school setting."

"People are passionate about it, and we recognize that," added Trammell. "We're listening, we're reading through the material, but we have not asked (Newsome) to do anything formally. I don't see us trying to make a class happen anytime soon."

The idea of adding Bible as an elective came forth after the School Board adopted science textbooks last month that included evolution as the only theory for how the universe came to be. Several residents asked the School Board to consider adding intelligent design to the science curriculum, although teaching that topic would be a violation of federal law.

"(Intelligent design) is not going to be something we are going to include in our curriculum," said Trammell. "What we have said is this does not mean students don't have the right to bring the subject up. It just cannot be included as part of our curriculum, and teachers are not going to be asked to initiate those discussions."
0 Replies
 
USAFHokie80
 
  1  
Mon 9 Jul, 2007 11:36 am
If it is so paramount that the great morals of the bible (ha) be taught to children, why can't this be taught at home? If there is a class that is to teach the bible at any public school, they had better offer every other major religion as an elective as well...

I wonder what the parents that want this class would say when their child elects NOT to take it.

My parents didn't teach me the bible, but I consider myself to be of at a moral character on par with the norm for the us. (note: i'm careful here not to set myself up as a superior being)
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Mon 9 Jul, 2007 12:13 pm
The great morals of the bible have been preached for the past two thousand years, and what has it gotten us? If that's an improvement, I'll eat my banana cream pie.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Mon 9 Jul, 2007 12:13 pm
Discussing a few previous translations of Ovid's Metamorphoses in his Translator's Note introducing his own lovely version, which date from 1567 (Golding) through 1955 (Watts), Mr Melville completes his short survey by remarking-

Quote:
In more recent years translations have appeared in the USA whose main value is as a warning of the difficulty of the task.


Perhaps his sense of fair play caused him to choose "main" rather than "only". Had there been any value in them I feel sure he would have drawn attention to it.

Translating the Bible properly requires, as it is already in English, skills which go beyond those of an ordinary translation from one language to another so one presumes Mr Melville would be even more scathing were he to address himself to American efforts in that direction.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Mon 9 Jul, 2007 12:23 pm
c.i. wrote-

Quote:
The great morals of the bible have been preached for the past two thousand years, and what has it gotten us? If that's an improvement, I'll eat my banana cream pie.


What utter defeatist and self-pitying pessimism that remark conveys.

Flaubert spent five years on the research for his novel Salammbo, which features my namesake, and his historical veracity has either gone unchallenged or where it has been challenged answered satisfactorily.

Read that c.i. and you will see where the morals of Christianity have "gotten" us.

I did think at first that because banana cream pie is so delicious you must think a great improvement has resulted but I'm inclined towards thinking that you have got your solecisms in a bit of a twist.
0 Replies
 
USAFHokie80
 
  1  
Mon 9 Jul, 2007 12:40 pm
The bible does teach morality... and hate, bigotry and oppression. The problem is it are these latter teachings that are demonstrated most often.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Mon 9 Jul, 2007 02:31 pm
Can you not see that the horror story of the Old Testament is necessary to add power to the New.

Just like the glory of the cavalry arriving in a movie near the end is a counter to what has gone before and the latter takes up most of the action. What would be the sense of the cavalry charging up with John Wayne in command on an Arcadian scene of rustic tranquillity?

What you just said is tantamount to saying that the movie taught scalping and raping and painting of the face.

What sort of hero would rescue the wench if she was spinning at her wheel humming sweet tunes?

The teachings of Jesus are rescuing us, very slowly I'll admit but that's human nature and not down to Jesus, from what went before. All heroic stories are modelled on that. Like Titanic. Some might say like Iraq. Some might say like the Faustian project itself to rescue the whole bloody world. Even dictators are better behaved than they used to be. We are getting there. Patience is a virtue. Our base animal core is not going to be overcome in a jiffy. Science gives it absolute mastery.

You are just moaning because you are not up for it. Ovid's creation story was known when our Bible was formed. The chosen story was deemed to suit our purposes better than others. It's all about social consequences. It isn't about anything else.
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  1  
Mon 9 Jul, 2007 02:43 pm
spendius wrote:
Can you not see that the horror story of the Old Testament is necessary to add power to the New.

Just like the glory of the cavalry arriving in a movie near the end is a counter to what has gone before and the latter takes up most of the action. What would be the sense of the cavalry charging up with John Wayne in command on an Arcadian scene of rustic tranquillity?

What you just said is tantamount to saying that the movie taught scalping and raping and painting of the face.

What sort of hero would rescue the wench if she was spinning at her wheel humming sweet tunes?

The teachings of Jesus are rescuing us, very slowly I'll admit but that's human nature and not down to Jesus, from what went before. All heroic stories are modelled on that. Like Titanic. Some might say like Iraq. Some might say like the Faustian project itself to rescue the whole bloody world. Even dictators are better behaved than they used to be. We are getting there. Patience is a virtue. Our base animal core is not going to be overcome in a jiffy. Science gives it absolute mastery.

You are just moaning because you are not up for it. Ovid's creation story was known when our Bible was formed. The chosen story was deemed to suit our purposes better than others. It's all about social consequences. It isn't about anything else.


The new testament isn't all roses Spendius.
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Mon 9 Jul, 2007 03:22 pm
wandeljw wrote:
VIRGINIA UPDATE

Quote:
Bible Battle
(Donna C. Gregory, Richmond Observer, July 9, 2007)

After losing the battle to add Intelligent Design to the science curriculum at county schools, several residents are now asking the Chesterfield School Board to consider allowing students to study the Bible as an elective.


Apparently they've given up on trying to cloak it in Intelligent Design and now they're just going straight at it.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Mon 9 Jul, 2007 03:25 pm
mappie wrote-

Quote:
The new testament isn't all roses Spendius.


It isn't all thorns either.

"They grew, they grew, so awful high,
Till they could grow no higher.
T'was there they tied a lover's knot,
The red rose and the briar. "

Barbara Allen. (A variant).
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.11 seconds on 07/13/2025 at 12:28:27