Jump to content
Goodbye Jesus

The Divine Irony Of 'intelligent Design'


Reverend AtheiStar

Recommended Posts

"Once you have made intelligence supreme, you have

elevated science to the highest form of knowing. And

with that move, the self-appointed champions of

religious tradition paint themselves into the same

corner that they would like to lead us out of. Using

intelligent design as a buttress against scientific

hegemony is, to borrow from a Yiddish proverb, as

outrageously selfdefeating as murdering your parents

and then pleading for leniency on the grounds that

you're an orphan."

 

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commen...omment-opinions

From the Los Angeles Times

The divine irony of 'intelligent design'

By Garret Keizer

GARRET KEIZER is the author of "Help: The Original

Human Dilemma."

 

February 24, 2006

 

ADVOCATES OF teaching "intelligent design" aren't

giving up, no matter the recent setbacks in California

and Pennsylvania. In Utah, Texas, New York and

elsewhere, they persist in trying to make science

education subservient to a religious worldview. And

yet the longer the controversy continues, the more it

illustrates their own subservience to science.

 

As its name suggests, the major premise of intelligent

design is that the existence of a supreme designer can

be inferred by evidence of his, her or its

"intelligence." And that premise rests in turn on an

even more basic assumption: that intelligence is the

most important, perceivable and telling attribute of

God and of the creature supposedly created in God's

image.

 

Minus the references to deity, this comes amazingly

close to the same hierarchy of value on which the

scientific worldview makes its case. Sense perception

and logic - not sensuousness and emotion - are the

keys to authentic understanding. Rationality will

point us to God, if there is one. I think, therefore I

am. He thinks like you can't even begin to think,

therefore he is God.

 

According to this mind-set, if we can discover a big

wooden boat on Mt. Ararat and carbon date it to the

sixth millennium BC, then the story of the flood in

Genesis might be "true." The authoritative shift is

self-evident. It's not a matter of "what the Bible

says," as authenticated by generations of shared

cultural experience. It's a matter of what science

says - or can be forced to say - about the Bible, as

verified by a body of data. If you're a bit lost here

as to whose mind-set I'm describing, that's my point.

 

For the advocates of intelligent design, the

loveliness of nature is a second-class road to truth.

It is "merely" aesthetic. In that regard, one notices

that there is no campaign afoot to teach "divine

inspiration" as the basis for the sacred works of Fra

Angelico and Bach. "That's next," you say, and maybe

it is next. The point here is that it wasn't first,

and it wasn't first for a very good reason.

 

Once you have made intelligence supreme, you have

elevated science to the highest form of knowing. And

with that move, the self-appointed champions of

religious tradition paint themselves into the same

corner that they would like to lead us out of. Using

intelligent design as a buttress against scientific

hegemony is, to borrow from a Yiddish proverb, as

outrageously selfdefeating as murdering your parents

and then pleading for leniency on the grounds that

you're an orphan.

 

The irony extends from means to ends. The motivating

force for many advocates of intelligent design, as for

the advocates of school prayer who preceded them, is

the perceived need for kids to have "some exposure" to

religious ideas. If they don't get a taste of that

stuff in school, they may never seek it elsewhere.

 

This is where the dismissal of intelligent design as

"bad science" doesn't go far enough. It can also be

dismissed as bad evangelism. The supporters of

intelligent design betray a sadly compromised

understanding of their own underlying mission. "The

knowledge of the living God" is apparently not to be

taught by lives of exemplary service but by fossil

evidence. "Let your light shine before others, so that

they may see your good works and give glory to your

father in heaven," Jesus says in the Sermon on the

Mount. Is it now to be understood that by "light" he

meant the kind that shines in a specimen case?

 

Finally, the supporters of intelligent design betray

their own secularist assumptions through their

insistence that Darwinian evolution be taught with the

disclaimer that it is "only a theory." One would

assume that, from the perspective of faith, a great

deal is only a theory. To apply that label exclusively

to evolution suggests otherwise. It suggests that we

inhabit a world of ubiquitous certainty. No one could

walk on water in such a world because the molecular

density of water is (unlike evolution, apparently)

beyond the theoretical. Of course, that is the view of

science, and the only proper view of science. One is

amazed, however, to find it promulgated in the cause

of religion.

 

This is not to make light of a serious threat posed by

the advocates of teaching intelligent design. I happen

to share the fears of those who see a theocratic

agenda at work in their campaign. At the same time, I

can't help but be amused by the notion of the entire

edifice of the Enlightenment crumbling beneath the

assault of a "religious" crusade. The barbarians may

be battering at the gates, but the gates are mostly

their own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Once you have made intelligence supreme, you have

elevated science to the highest form of knowing. And

with that move, the self-appointed champions of

religious tradition paint themselves into the same

corner that they would like to lead us out of. Using

intelligent design as a buttress against scientific

hegemony is, to borrow from a Yiddish proverb, as

outrageously selfdefeating as murdering your parents

and then pleading for leniency on the grounds that

you're an orphan."

This cannot be stressed enough! It is the ultimate in hypocrisy that so permeates christianity (let's face it, it's the christian god IDers are promoting).

 

I could add to this, but my irony meter just broke pegging out on the high end. I must now go to Spencer's and buy another one. :lmao:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Rev, excellent article-bomb..

 

Been delivered from high altitude and via sappers under the wire at several religio-fascists, err republican xtian strongholds.. ;)

 

kL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is the ultimate in hypocrisy that so permeates christianity (let's face it, it's the christian god IDers are promoting).

 

I totally agree. ID is a Christian movement. It was thought up by Christains as a legal strategy to get around the First Amendment. It's their trojan horse to get their religion into the classroom. It was working for a small while but then the most wonderful judgement was handed down in Dover by none other than a Dumbya appointee! This shattered their horse and exposed not only who was inside but everything that led up to it's creation. I have it on my site here. I titled it "The Dover Smackdown!" lol... It reads like a novel!

 

I could add to this, but my irony meter just broke pegging out on the high end. I must now go to Spencer's and buy another one. :lmao:

 

lol... I want one of those God Detectors. They look like a cool thing to carry around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought this was a particulary shrewd observation:

The "knowledge of the living God" is apparently not to be taught by lives of exemplary service but by fossil evidence.

 

Do christians ID proponents ever read the bible? Why don't they get it? Is their faith so shaky and fragile they must warp reality to protect it? :shrug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Rev, excellent arricle-bomb..

 

Been delivered from high altitude and via sappers under the wire at several religio-fascists, err republican xtian strongholds.. ;)

 

kL

 

Thanks! So you spread it around? What's been the feedback?

 

 

I thought this was a particulary shrewd observation:

The "knowledge of the living God" is apparently not to be taught by lives of exemplary service but by fossil evidence.

 

Do christians ID proponents ever read the bible? Why don't they get it? Is their faith so shaky and fragile they must warp reality to protect it? :shrug:

 

Most Christians nowadays don't read their book. Do you blame them, though? It is quite long and boring! What they do is just read a few parts here and there -- and even that is guided by their pastor/father/minister. This is why I always try to point as many Christians as I can to skepticsannotatedbible.com. I can't get enough of that site!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rev...

 

Mostly on the lines of "YOU FUCKING GOD HATING ATTTTTEEEEEEEEEEIIISTTTTT!" along the lines of the Margerite Perrin "Psykikz" and "slackiks!!" shouting... :)

 

I'm returning to the pits of fyndidom in a few after finding some more good tidbits contra-ID to drop in thrit dog bowls.. ;)

 

kL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rev...

 

Mostly on the lines of "YOU FUCKING GOD HATING ATTTTTEEEEEEEEEEIIISTTTTT!" along the lines of the Margerite Perrin "Psykikz" and "slackiks!!" shouting... :)

 

I'm returning to the pits of fyndidom in a few after finding some more good tidbits contra-ID to drop in thrit dog bowls.. ;)

 

kL

 

lol... Such moral and loving people they are.

 

If you want an easy way to find good articles on evolution and ID just type those words into this alert. It'll find it all for you, on a daily basis, and drop it in your mailbox.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.