You've got a good point. The intelligence I project onto the surrounding Universe can only be human because I myself am human. But my 'human' consciousness does not exist in a void. I tend to see 'consciousness' (intelligence) beyond myself. My own consciousness is but a part of a much grander sceme of consciousness. At least this is how I perceive it.
Intelligent Design is a legitimate concept
- Thread starter s_lone
- Start date
You've got a good point. The intelligence I project onto the surrounding Universe can only be human because I myself am human. But my 'human' consciousness does not exist in a void. I tend to see 'consciousness' (intelligence) beyond myself. My own consciousness is but a part of a much grander sceme of consciousness. At least this is how I perceive it.
Good girl.
(Don't take that as condescending, please, because I meant it. It's simple; no-one can be right all the time. In spite of thew fact I am human and have a modicum of ego, it's simply logical to admit being wrong when one is wrong. Saves time in the long run. As J K Galbraith once said, "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof."
It's becomes clear in the rest of that essay what Carroll means. ID is presented as a scientifically valid alternative to evolution by people like Duane Gish of the Discovery Institute and some of his noisier supporters, but it's not. It has no scientific merit whatsoever, essentially because, as I've described elsewhere, it's a useless hypothesis in that context. But there there's no necessary contradiction between it and evolution. Evolution has nothing to say about a designer, it describes what natural selection is and how it works, not why it works. The why is the metaphysical question that ID attempts to answer, and does a pretty lame job of it in my view; it amounts to saying little more than "Just because."