How can we reconcile the argument of intelligent design with supposed design flaws?

[Aloysium]

Only God knows if there is a reason but it is possible there are ultimate facts which are intrinsically inexplicable. Otherwise there would apparently be an infinite regress of explanations!

It seems that is the case. The more we know, the more we realize that we don’t know. I think it was Socrates who said, “The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing.” In the end we are left with wonder.

 

[magnet]

The following is an excerpt from Neil deGrasse Tyson’s article detailing the nature of the universe:
haydenplanetarium.org/tyson/read/2005/11/01/the-perimeter-of-ignorance

Turns out that some celestial bodies give off more light in the invisible bands of the spectrum than in the visible. And the invisible light picked up by the new telescopes showed that mayhem abounds in the cosmos: monstrous gamma-ray bursts, deadly pulsars, matter-crushing gravitational fields, matter-hungry black holes that flay their bloated stellar neighbors, newborn stars igniting within pockets of collapsing gas. And as our ordinary, optical telescopes got bigger and better, more mayhem emerged: galaxies that collide and cannibalize each other, explosions of supermassive stars, chaotic stellar and planetary orbits. Our own cosmic neighborhood—the inner solar system—turned out to be a shooting gallery, full of rogue asteroids and comets that collide with planets from time to time. Occasionally they’ve even wiped out stupendous masses of Earth’s flora and fauna. The evidence all points to the fact that we occupy not a well-mannered clockwork universe, but a destructive, violent, and hostile zoo.

How does this fit in with the intelligent design idea?

 

[Peter_Plato]

The following is an excerpt from Neil deGrasse Tyson’s article detailing the nature of the universe:
haydenplanetarium.org/tyson/read/2005/11/01/the-perimeter-of-ignorance

Turns out that some celestial bodies give off more light in the invisible bands of the spectrum than in the visible. And the invisible light picked up by the new telescopes showed that mayhem abounds in the cosmos: monstrous gamma-ray bursts, deadly pulsars, matter-crushing gravitational fields, matter-hungry black holes that flay their bloated stellar neighbors, newborn stars igniting within pockets of collapsing gas. And as our ordinary, optical telescopes got bigger and better, more mayhem emerged: galaxies that collide and cannibalize each other, explosions of supermassive stars, chaotic stellar and planetary orbits. Our own cosmic neighborhood—the inner solar system—turned out to be a shooting gallery, full of rogue asteroids and comets that collide with planets from time to time. Occasionally they’ve even wiped out stupendous masses of Earth’s flora and fauna. The evidence all points to the fact that we occupy not a well-mannered clockwork universe, but a destructive, violent, and hostile zoo.

How does this fit in with the intelligent design idea?

It makes me think that Neil never worked in a steel mill, a construction site or a factory. A whole lot of noise and mathem does not mean something constructive is not going on behind the immediate chaos. His point comprises a whole lot of rhetoric and very little substance,

The stars are “ovens” for producing the elements that are the basic building blocks of creation. Merely because the whole shebang is a bit intimidating to those who expect a genteel Mary Poppins as Creator doesn’t argue much of a point, although like little children frightened to the bone by a walk through a factory where only the chaos is apparent to them, Neil’s point will have effect on those uncomfortable with frightful things which are beyond their ability to control or tame. They might even demand safe spaces be provided.

 

[Peter_Plato]

The following is an excerpt from Neil deGrasse Tyson’s article detailing the nature of the universe:
haydenplanetarium.org/tyson/read/2005/11/01/the-perimeter-of-ignorance

Turns out that some celestial bodies give off more light in the invisible bands of the spectrum than in the visible. And the invisible light picked up by the new telescopes showed that mayhem abounds in the cosmos: monstrous gamma-ray bursts, deadly pulsars, matter-crushing gravitational fields, matter-hungry black holes that flay their bloated stellar neighbors, newborn stars igniting within pockets of collapsing gas. And as our ordinary, optical telescopes got bigger and better, more mayhem emerged: galaxies that collide and cannibalize each other, explosions of supermassive stars, chaotic stellar and planetary orbits. Our own cosmic neighborhood—the inner solar system—turned out to be a shooting gallery, full of rogue asteroids and comets that collide with planets from time to time. Occasionally they’ve even wiped out stupendous masses of Earth’s flora and fauna. The evidence all points to the fact that we occupy not a well-mannered clockwork universe, but a destructive, violent, and hostile zoo.

How does this fit in with the intelligent design idea?

I would suppose that the best test for his argument is the point at which Dr. Tyson resigns all of his academic posts and entitlements, and occupies himself with some other more promising pursuit. Clearly if the universe is an unintelligible mess, then it would seem the greatest self-delusion to go about pretending it can be understood by intelligent pursuit. At the point that Tyson puts his money where his mouth is, at that point I will begin to take seriously that he believes his own words that the universe is an undesigned dystopian mess.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

The following is an excerpt from Neil deGrasse Tyson’s article detailing the nature of the universe:
haydenplanetarium.org/tyson/read/2005/11/01/the-perimeter-of-ignorance

Turns out that some celestial bodies give off more light in the invisible bands of the spectrum than in the visible. And the invisible light picked up by the new telescopes showed that mayhem abounds in the cosmos: monstrous gamma-ray bursts, deadly pulsars, matter-crushing gravitational fields, matter-hungry black holes that flay their bloated stellar neighbors, newborn stars igniting within pockets of collapsing gas. And as our ordinary, optical telescopes got bigger and better, more mayhem emerged: galaxies that collide and cannibalize each other, explosions of supermassive stars, chaotic stellar and planetary orbits. Our own cosmic neighborhood—the inner solar system—turned out to be a shooting gallery, full of rogue asteroids and comets that collide with planets from time to time. Occasionally they’ve even wiped out stupendous masses of Earth’s flora and fauna. The evidence all points to the fact that we occupy not a well-mannered clockwork universe, but a destructive, violent, and hostile zoo.

How does this fit in with the intelligent design idea?

God is a playwright who wants to entertain his audience with unresolved mysteries.

Your atheism leaves nothing unresolved and everything as obvious and humdrum as can be.

 

[DCNBILL]

The following is an excerpt from Neil deGrasse Tyson’s article detailing the nature of the universe:
haydenplanetarium.org/tyson/read/2005/11/01/the-perimeter-of-ignorance

Turns out that some celestial bodies give off more light in the invisible bands of the spectrum than in the visible. And the invisible light picked up by the new telescopes showed that mayhem abounds in the cosmos: monstrous gamma-ray bursts, deadly pulsars, matter-crushing gravitational fields, matter-hungry black holes that flay their bloated stellar neighbors, newborn stars igniting within pockets of collapsing gas. And as our ordinary, optical telescopes got bigger and better, more mayhem emerged: galaxies that collide and cannibalize each other, explosions of supermassive stars, chaotic stellar and planetary orbits. Our own cosmic neighborhood—the inner solar system—turned out to be a shooting gallery, full of rogue asteroids and comets that collide with planets from time to time. Occasionally they’ve even wiped out stupendous masses of Earth’s flora and fauna. The evidence all points to the fact that we occupy not a well-mannered clockwork universe, but a destructive, violent, and hostile zoo.

How does this fit in with the intelligent design idea?

We are here.

 

[tonyrey]

The following is an excerpt from Neil deGrasse Tyson’s article detailing the nature of the universe:
haydenplanetarium.org/tyson/read/2005/11/01/the-perimeter-of-ignorance

Turns out that some celestial bodies give off more light in the invisible bands of the spectrum than in the visible. And the invisible light picked up by the new telescopes showed that mayhem abounds in the cosmos: monstrous gamma-ray bursts, deadly pulsars, matter-crushing gravitational fields, matter-hungry black holes that flay their bloated stellar neighbors, newborn stars igniting within pockets of collapsing gas. And as our ordinary, optical telescopes got bigger and better, more mayhem emerged: galaxies that collide and cannibalize each other, explosions of supermassive stars, chaotic stellar and planetary orbits. Our own cosmic neighborhood—the inner solar system—turned out to be a shooting gallery, full of rogue asteroids and comets that collide with planets from time to time. Occasionally they’ve even wiped out stupendous masses of Earth’s flora and fauna. The evidence all points to the fact that we occupy not a well-mannered clockwork universe, but a destructive, violent, and hostile zoo.

How does this fit in with the intelligent design idea?

If the universe is such a destructive, violent and hostile zoo it is a miracle that life has not only survived for almost for four billion years but succeeded in developing to such an extent that an incredibly minute freak of nature on an insignificant planet has achieved the remarkable feat of reaching the conclusion that nothing makes sense - except of course his conclusion that nothing makes sense…

 

[edwest2]

If the universe is such a destructive, violent and hostile zoo it is a miracle that life has not only survived for almost for four billion years but succeeded in developing to such an extent that an incredibly minute freak of nature on an insignificant planet has achieved the remarkable feat of reaching the conclusion that nothing makes sense - except of course his conclusion that nothing makes sense…

Yes. The ‘nothing makes sense conclusion’ doesn’t explain anything.

Ed

 

[tonyrey]

We are here.

Three words which refute the notion that the universe is a destructive, violent and hostile zoo - and reflect the impression that** this planet** is a destructive, violent and hostile zoo as the result of human greed, selfishness, indifference and the lust for power.

 

[tonyrey]

Yes. The ‘nothing makes sense conclusion’ doesn’t explain anything.

Except the illogical argument, Ed!

 

[Solmyr]

We are here.

Is this the evidence of “design” or the evidence of “flaw”?

Remember the great cartoon of Calvin and Hobbes, where Hobbs says: “The most convincing evidence that there are intelligent beings in the Universe is that they never tried to contact us!”

 

[tonyrey]

I would suppose that the best test for his argument is the point at which Dr. Tyson resigns all of his academic posts and entitlements, and occupies himself with some other more promising pursuit. Clearly if the universe is an unintelligible mess, then it would seem the greatest self-delusion to go about pretending it can be understood by intelligent pursuit. At the point that Tyson puts his money where his mouth is, at that point I will begin to take seriously that he believes his own words that the universe is an undesigned dystopian mess.

:clapping: It is very easy to attack and destroy but to create a foundation on which persons can develop and live in harmony is rather more difficult…

 

[tonyrey]

Is this the evidence of “design” or the evidence of “flaw”?

Remember the great cartoon of Calvin and Hobbes, where Hobbs says: “The most convincing evidence that there are intelligent beings in the Universe is that they never tried to contact us!”

If you are consistent and agree with Hobbes that life is “nasty, brutish and short” there is obviously no need to prolong your misery!

 

[tonyrey]

God is a playwright who wants to entertain his audience with unresolved mysteries.

Your atheism leaves nothing unresolved and everything as obvious and humdrum as can be.

Indeed! The best test of any theory is whether it is fertile and productive. As Lear said, nothing shall come from nothing…

 

[tonyrey]

We could add the Roman Cicero to the list.

“When you see a sundial or a water-clock, you see that it tells the time by design and not by chance. How then can you imagine that the universe as a whole is devoid of purpose and intelligence, when it embraces everything, including these artifacts themselves and their artificers?” (Cicero, De Natura Deorum, ii. 34)

Thanks for that contribution, Charlie. Materialism amounts to getting something for nothing…

 

[tonyrey]

It seems that is the case. The more we know, the more we realize that we don’t know. I think it was Socrates who said, “The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing.” In the end we are left with wonder.

Which is why agnosticism is more reasonable than atheism but Sartre pointed out (perhaps unaware Jesus had made the same point) that it is impossible to remain uncommitted. In life we cannot sit on the fence indefinitely. The way we live reveals what we really believe…

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Thanks for that contribution, Charlie. Materialism amounts to getting something for nothing…

Ignorant Child: “What is matter?”

Smart Atheist: “Never mind!”

“My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble minds. That deeply emotional conviction of the presence of a superior reasoning power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible universe, forms my idea of God.” Albert Einstein

 

[Solmyr]

If you are consistent and agree with Hobbes that life is “nasty, brutish and short” there is obviously no need to prolong your misery!

This level of irrationality is almost too painful to see. There is nothing in the JOKE put into the mouth of a TOY TIGER which would indicate that life is “nasty, brutish and short”. What it actually means that many people are incredibly irrational, and intelligent beings would not seek to mingle with them. Of course this is a tongue-in-cheek JOKE, not to be taken too seriously. Savvy?

 

[Peter_Plato]

Is this the evidence of “design” or the evidence of “flaw”?

Remember the great cartoon of Calvin and Hobbes, where Hobbs says: “The most convincing evidence that there are intelligent beings in the Universe is that they never tried to contact us!”

Not sure why that would be considered “convincing evidence” except to add a note of levity to the otherwise vexing imbroglio that we human beings find ourselves held within.

Perhaps “never tried to contact us" is evidence that the Creator of it all has a perplexing sense of humour in addition to those completely bewildering creative powers?

On the other hand, we could take very seriously the claim that the Creator took on human flesh and walked/walks among us. That could, in fact, be evidence of something more audacious than the mere intelligence of so-called “intelligent beings" at the level evidenced in Homo sapiens sapiens.

 

[magnet]

Not sure why that would be considered “convincing evidence” except to add a note of levity to the otherwise vexing imbroglio that we human beings find ourselves held within.

Perhaps “never tried to contact us" is evidence that the Creator of it all has a perplexing sense of humour in addition to those completely bewildering creative powers?

On the other hand, we could take very seriously the claim that the Creator took on human flesh and walked/walks among us. That could, in fact, be evidence of something more audacious than the mere intelligence of so-called “intelligent beings" at the level evidenced in Homo sapiens sapiens.

It has been stated that before the “Big Bang”, the whole universe was compressed into a tiny sphere smaller than the size of a pin head. Did Creation of the Universe occur at the time of the “Big Bang”?