Deist Answer to Absurdity

Gnomon wrote:

Aaron wrote:

I guess I'm somewhere between ET and IE because I think that the "designer" in the IE theory is itself an emergent process.

That raises the old chicken & egg question: which came first, the design or the designer? Since I am a designer by profession, I have difficulty imagining how the process would work in reverse.

However, if I ignore the chicken sh*t, the idea of God self-creating has a sort of perverse appeal. It reminds me of the Escher picture of hands drawing themselves. The bottom line is "I just don't know for sure". But the designer designing is my story, for now, and I'm sticking to it.

I believe the idea of self creating is illogical. To create yourself you must first exist and if you exist then you didn't create yourself.

Gnomon wrote:

~~~ conjecture continued~~~


Creation Theory (CT) is based on an ancient understanding of how things are designed from scratch. It uses the metaphor of a powerful wizard conjuring-up something from nothing by saying a few magic words. It’s usually called the “God” hypothesis. Magical thinking is the rule.

Evolution Theory (ET) is based on Darwin's concept of the un-planned, un-directed, emergence of living creatures from non-living matter by an essentially random process of trial and error. It refers to the vague progressive tendency of evolution as the function of a mysterious, impersonal agency called Natural Selection. Some call this the "Blind-Watchmaker" theory. Reason and Logic are not required in this scenario.

Intelligent Design (ID) theory seems to be based on a19th century notion of the design process. It implies a direct, linear, mechanical engineering approach to creation. This is often called the “Watchmaker” hypothesis. Classical Logic is the Law.

Intelligent Evolution (IE) is a theory*** based on a 21st century concept of a more round-about creative process. It follows the flow of information from the initial metaphysical idea to the final physical manifestation of the original formal cause. You might call IE the “In-Former” hypothesis. Fuzzy Logic sets the general parameters.

Unlike CT and ID, for IE theory Randomness is an essential component of the design process. It constantly generates options and alternatives to be chosen by the program of yes/no logic gates Darwin called "Natural Selection". Together, they manage to create novelties that come closer-and-closer, over many generations, to the designer’s intended end-state. But they do it without any direct intervention by the “Intender”. A crude example of such a process is “Evolutionary Informatics” in computer simulations of biological evolution.

[url] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_informatics[/url]

***my personal theory.

I believe God designed the whole of the universe. I believe the only thing God did of direct creation is just get it all started. God didn't create Man, he created the universe and the evolutionary process to evolve creates like Man. So, God didn't create creatures, instead he created a creature making machine.

So, which theory best describes me?

Schizophretard wrote:

I believe God designed the whole of the universe. I believe the only thing God did of direct creation is just get it all started. God didn't create Man, he created the universe and the evolutionary process to evolve creates like Man. So, God didn't create creatures, instead he created a creature making machine.

So, which theory best describes me?

Congratulations! You sir, are an Intelligent Evolutionary.

The Roman poet Lucretius (99--55 BC) was perhaps the first existentialist. In his long scientific poem, On the Nature of Things, he said:

<< Nothing from nothing ever yet was born.

. . . . It was no design of the atoms that led them to arrange themselves in order with keen intelligence . . .

The nature of the universe has by no means been made through divine power, seeing how great are the faults that mar it.

No single thing abides, but all things flow [evolution?]

Even if there lurk behind some veil of sky
The fabled Maker, the Immortal Spy,
Ready to torture each poor life he made,
Thou canst do more than God can---thou canst die. >>


Do the "faults of nature" belie the "keen intelligence" of a "divine power"? Or do the imperfections of nature lie in the mind of the beholder?

Gnomon wrote:

Schizophretard wrote:

I believe God designed the whole of the universe. I believe the only thing God did of direct creation is just get it all started. God didn't create Man, he created the universe and the evolutionary process to evolve creates like Man. So, God didn't create creatures, instead he created a creature making machine.

So, which theory best describes me?

Congratulations! You sir, are an Intelligent Evolutionary.

Cool! Do I get a prize?

Gnomon wrote:

The Roman poet Lucretius (99--55 BC) was perhaps the first existentialist. In his long scientific poem, On the Nature of Things, he said:

<< Nothing from nothing ever yet was born.

. . . . It was no design of the atoms that led them to arrange themselves in order with keen intelligence . . .

The nature of the universe has by no means been made through divine power, seeing how great are the faults that mar it.

No single thing abides, but all things flow [evolution?]

Even if there lurk behind some veil of sky
The fabled Maker, the Immortal Spy,
Ready to torture each poor life he made,
Thou canst do more than God can---thou canst die. >>


Do the "faults of nature" belie the "keen intelligence" of a "divine power"? Or do the imperfections of nature lie in the mind of the beholder?

I would say that the imperfections of nature lie in the mind of the beholder because I don't see any imperfections in nature.