Here is one thing that most of us can agree on; that is “Intelligent Design”.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jimmy_B
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The fourth way is taken from the gradation to be found in things. Among beings there are some more and some less good, true, noble and the like. But “more” and “less” are predicated of different things, according as they resemble in their different ways something which is the maximum, as a thing is said to be hotter according as it more nearly resembles that which is hottest; so that there is something which is truest, something best, something noblest and, consequently, something which is uttermost being; for those things that are greatest in truth are greatest in being, as it is written in Metaph. ii. Now the maximum in any genus is the cause of all in that genus; as fire, which is the maximum heat, is the cause of all hot things. Therefore there must also be something which is to all beings the cause of their being, goodness, and every other perfection; and this we call God.
Click to expand...
The fifth way is taken from the governance of the world. We see that things which lack intelligence, such as natural bodies, act for an end, and this is evident from their acting always, or nearly always, in the same way, so as to obtain the best result. Hence it is plain that not fortuitously, but designedly, do they achieve their end. Now whatever lacks intelligence cannot move towards an end, unless it be directed by some being endowed with knowledge and intelligence; as the arrow is shot to its mark by the archer. Therefore some intelligent being exists by whom all natural things are directed to their end; and this being we call God.
Click to expand...
(The Summa Theologica of St. Thomas Aquinas)
Click to expand...
 
***“Therefore some intelligent being exists by whom all natural things are directed to their end; and this being we call God.”
Click to expand...
(The Summa Theologica of St. Thomas Aquinas 1272-1274)

I bet that this is not the answer that many of you here were expecting…Please continue…
 
cerad said:
Please list these “multiple cooperating components” of which you speak. Be detailed. Feel free to reference any papers you may have published on the subject in scientific journals.

Limpets are fascinating creatures. I’ll be very interested in reading your publications.
Click to expand...
I’d be interested in reading your publications as well…
 
Jimmy_B said:
I bet that this is not the answer that many of you here were expecting…Please continue…*
Click to expand...
Jimmy,

The problem, as I noted, is that “Intelligent Design” is being used today in a quite different way. If you don’t mean the “ID” theory of Behe and Dembski et al., why on earth use the term?

Aquinas’s argument isn’t even quite the same as the Enlightenment-era “argument from design,” which in turn is not the same as ID.

Edwin
 
Jimmy_B said:
I bet that this is not the answer that many of you here were expecting…Please continue…*
Click to expand...
CAF needs a script that analyzes the words in the original post and automatically heads up each thread with the appropriate quotation from St. Thomas Aquinas. :cool:
 
cerad said:
Please list these “multiple cooperating components” of which you speak. Be detailed. Feel free to reference any papers you may have published on the subject in scientific journals.

Limpets are fascinating creatures. I’ll be very interested in reading your publications.
Click to expand...
Nerve cells
Nerve fibers
photoreceptors
brain cells

I have no publications on limpets, just a few facts and some common sense.

I’m open to correction, however!
 
CHESTERTONRULES said:
Nerve cells
Nerve fibers
photoreceptors
brain cells
Click to expand...
All these things existed in the ancestor of mollusks, which was most likely a worm of some sort:
The consensus among zoologists is that the mollusks evolved from a worm-like ancestor, because patterns of early development, very conservative traits, are similar to those of living worms. Most frequently mentioned are sipunculids, but polychaetes, and echiurid worms are also good candidates for the living worms most resembling the presumed ancestor of mollusks.
Click to expand...
 
Siddhartha said:
All these things existed in the ancestor of mollusks, which was most likely a worm of some sort:
Click to expand...
However, unless they created some competitive advantage, they would not have remained.

Could photoreceptors offer an advantage if there weren’t attached nerve fibers to convey the information?

Can you make a photo receptor, by the way?
 
CHESTERTONRULES said:
However, unless they created some competitive advantage, they would not have remained.

Could photoreceptors offer an advantage if there weren’t attached nerve fibers to convey the information?
Click to expand...
Sure. Euglena doesn’t have nerve fibers, and yet it has a eye-spot that contains photo-receptor molecules, helping it orient towards sunlight.

http://www.agen.ufl.edu/~chyn/age20...aricopa.edu/faculty/farabee/BIOBK/euglena.gif
Can you make a photo receptor, by the way?
Click to expand...
No need to make one. Nature has made quite a few.
 
Siddhartha said:
Sure. Euglena doesn’t have nerve fibers, and yet it has a eye-spot that contains photo-receptor molecules, helping it orient towards sunlight.

/OnLineBiology/OLBB/www.emc.maricopa.edu/faculty/farabee/BIOBK/euglena.gif
Click to expand...
OK. I’ll concede this.
No need to make one. Nature has made quite a few.
Click to expand...
What is nature?
 
Contarini said:
Jimmy,

The problem, as I noted, is that “Intelligent Design” is being used today in a quite different way. If you don’t mean the “ID” theory of Behe and Dembski et al., why on earth use the term?

Aquinas’s argument isn’t even quite the same as the Enlightenment-era “argument from design,” which in turn is not the same as ID.

Edwin
Click to expand...
Thanks Contarini,

I know that, just starting a discussion…more of a “Proof of God” type of discussion. “Intelligent Design” has been used in many different ways; most recently, to include Creationism into schools, to counter “The Theory of Evolution”…Terms are hijacked all the time and used to promote all sorts of ideologies’. I like St. Thomas Aquinas’ definition best. There have been some interesting posts here thus far. When I have more time, I would like to respond to some of them. Thank you for your post.
 
I don’t know about any Muslim posters here but I’m having too hard a job getting past the picture.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top