Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

UNintelligent Design.

page: 4
5
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join

posted on May, 3 2012 @ 08:02 PM
link   
If intelligence is the ability process information.
Is the possibility of intelligence not more primal and significant ?
The construction of phenomena that we may consider, is possibly not intelligence like we posses, but I would not be so bold as to reduce the significance of that which we build our own intelligence. After all, intelligence exists, or so we say

Pantheism is the view that the Universe (or Nature) and God (or divinity) are identical

In this context it seems obvious to me, that the progression of the system (God) exhibits a creative spontaneity that far surpasses our own notions of intelligence.

The debate of intelligent design most often implies some entity creating a rigid design that yields what we observe as 'the creation'. This for me is most unsatisfying . Perhaps the most profoundly intelligent design, is one that is dynamic, adaptive , does not rely on ordered logic and thrives on random probabilities.

This, for me, reconciles science and spirituality.
edit on 3-5-2012 by rom12345 because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 3 2012 @ 09:21 PM
link   
I saw 8 or 9 what looked like stars doing circles and figure 8 s one day in my backyard, and it wasn't a hallucination my whole family saw them. Aliens might have planted a seed on this planet a long time ago, from there world as a test or to not be alone. This could've also been god or a god " show me a sign" or using signs.

Say evolution was true, square one an amoeba . We are 6 feet tall with small intestine, large intestine, kidneys, livers hearts, corneas, brains, optic nerves a whole central nervous system, a whole digestive system , 5 senses, logic , rationale. An amoeba plus a billion or a trillion. Along with millions of other different forms of life on this planet.

This site is mostly aetheist , but did you rule out intelligent design by alien or from alien origin. I used to hear evolution in school and thought nothing of it kept my head down and kept moving . Then I was around these religious people who were laughing at the thought saying you think we came from a monkey. If the human body was an android or something that was built it would be top of the line. We are almost like gods on this planet compared to the animals. Fully moveable and pose able arms and legs and the design. A lion wouldn't be able to hold a pen , paint a picture or drive a car.

When I first got to this site I said that letters are nothing more than lines in the sand. If you look at the building blocks or framework or things from a different angle or a unique way, I don't know try to see through the matrix or something. We fell into outer space and went to the moon, I would say we surpassed natures evolutionary chain and reached the top or we are something else.



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 03:52 AM
link   
reply to post by TheCelestialHuman
 



At this point in time, we do not know enough to confirm the existence or nonexistence of god, but we do know that a god is not required for everything to work.


No, you don't know that. Another assumption on your part.


All your work is still ahead of you or any other creationist in proving the existence of a creator.


There is no point in me proving the existence of the Almighty to you. It is you that needs to prove the existence of the Almighty to you. After all, how can I prove it? I simply can't, it's not in my hands.


good luck in doing so


Same to you.



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 09:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by InfoKartel
reply to post by TheCelestialHuman
 



At this point in time, we do not know enough to confirm the existence or nonexistence of god, but we do know that a god is not required for everything to work.


No, you don't know that. Another assumption on your part.


How is admitting that we can't confirm the existence or non existence of god an assumption? It's the truth. Not a single person on earth can prove or disprove god beyond a reasonable doubt and there's no evidence to suggest a god is required for ANYTHING in the universe.



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by BladeRunner5050
Evolution says we all came from the water then fish grew legs and walked on land, amphibian s and frogs. That we evolved from monkeys at the zoo and some got left behind for " some" reason.


No it doesnt...regardless of whether you believe in something or not, at least try and be educated about what the object of your disbelief actually states.



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by idmonster

Originally posted by BladeRunner5050
Evolution says we all came from the water then fish grew legs and walked on land, amphibian s and frogs. That we evolved from monkeys at the zoo and some got left behind for " some" reason.


No it doesnt...regardless of whether you believe in something or not, at least try and be educated about what the object of your disbelief actually states.


Actually, that is exactly what evolution states, more or less.

There are technical details, but those details basically support the summary given above.



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by rom12345
 


I'm tempted to say I'm pantheist...but see, pantheism touches the first quarter of the racing track, pretty much. There's still a lot more of it left in the dirt to be uncovered.



In this context it seems obvious to me, that the progression of the system (God) exhibits a creative spontaneity that far surpasses our own notions of intelligence.


Our intelligence is nowhere near enough to even touch the beginning of as much understanding as we pretend to have of the entity or being we call "god".


Perhaps the most profoundly intelligent design, is one that is dynamic, adaptive , does not rely on ordered logic and thrives on random probabilities.

This, for me, reconciles science and spirituality.


You mean a system that is designed in such a way that no matter what sort of variables are thrown into the stew, they will be adjusted to created a world with species that will automatically reorganize to survive and flourish?

True intelligence...but that implies that the fabric of reality itself has some sort of built-in intelligence...reality is part of nature, is it not? I'm not talking about perceived reality...I'm talking the actual reality, completely clear of any bias or filter.
edit on CFridaypm535302f02America/Chicago04 by Starchild23 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Barcs
 


The previous poster said: "but we do know that a god is not required for everything to work."

While, you can't prove god exists or not(for argument sake). So how can he know that god isn't required to make everything work? The claim that he knows there's no god required is an assumption.



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Starchild23
 


It certainly has some profound information processing capabilities, which is how I would describe intelligence.



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 03:02 PM
link   
reply to post by InfoKartel
 


The Notion of the Abrahamic God is somewhat disappointing to me in scope and purpose.
God certainly exists, but by a definition we can not fathom in anthropomorphic terms.
For this I need no faith, I am sure.
I do however find the hole God as a man thing quite distasteful, bordering on 'blasphemy'.
edit on 4-5-2012 by rom12345 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 03:06 PM
link   
reply to post by rom12345
 


Then I suspect you're on the same page as me.

In other words, I believe the being so loosely termed as "god" to be EVERYTHING...literally, the sub-subatomic energy that makes up every atomic particle in existence. It all has an intelligence on a level that only those with ESP can begin to sense, because we're still an infant race.

Which is why it both amuses me and annoys me that Homo Sapiens, which has existed in full maturity for a mere 50,000 years, thinks it can define in only 2,000 years the very source of everything, considering we still haven't discovered every piece of the atom, let alone mastered its physics.

I myself have only one word that begins to accurately describe that being, as I have stated before: SOURCE.



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 03:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Starchild23
reply to post by rom12345
 

I myself have only one word that begins to accurately describe that being, as I have stated before: SOURCE.


Perhaps even the un-manifested possibility.
A possibility can be systemic, and outside a temporal framework, this can be shown by the fact that certain possibilities may never actually emerge. In essence, pure concept.

yet
"Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd."
— Voltaire

I do quite enjoy the notion of einsof

Ein Sof is the divine origin of all created existence, in contrast to the Ein (or Ayn), which is infinite no-thingness.



in Kabbalah, is understood as God prior to self-manifestation in the production of any spiritual Realm,
edit on 4-5-2012 by rom12345 because: (no reason given)



It is the origin of the Ohr Ein Sof, the "Infinite Light" of paradoxical Divine self-knowledge, nullified within the Ein Sof prior to Creation


this to me describes a self negating mathematical operator.

not not, so to speak.
or the square root of -1 = i
edit on 4-5-2012 by rom12345 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by InfoKartel
 





The previous poster said: "but we do know that a god is not required for everything to work." While, you can't prove god exists or not(for argument sake). So how can he know that god isn't required to make everything work? The claim that he knows there's no god required is an assumption.

It is not an assumption that everything works without the idea of god. the laws of gravity for example, a supreme being/creator is not needed for gravity to work.. there are other explanations for what causes these things other than saying "god did it". It is fact that everything could work without the idea of god. religion is our first attempt at explaining things, and because it's our first, it's our worst. We now have better explanations to explain the universe and everything observable other than simple saying "god did it".
edit on 4-5-2012 by TheCelestialHuman because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by InfoKartel
reply to post by Barcs
 


The previous poster said: "but we do know that a god is not required for everything to work."

While, you can't prove god exists or not(for argument sake). So how can he know that god isn't required to make everything work? The claim that he knows there's no god required is an assumption.


The statement holds weight, it's just a little confusion with the term 'everything'. I don't think he's trying to say that god is not required for anything. Every "thing". Maybe he's responsible for some things, who knows, but definitely not everything. The system is self sufficient.
edit on 4-5-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 10:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Barcs
 





The statement holds weight, it's just a little confusion with the term 'everything'. I don't think he's trying to say that god is not required for anything. Every "thing". Maybe he's responsible for some things, who knows, but definitely not everything. The system is self sufficient.

What i mean is god is not required for everything that we currently can observe and everything we know. All scientific facts, theories, and laws work without a god being in the system.. for example, (this is a true story, i just can't remember specific names) a king asked an astronomer to make a model of the solar system. When presenting the model to the king, the king asked, "where is god in all of this?" the astronomer replied,"it works without that assumption." god can not currently be proven or disproven, but we do have better explanations to things credited as the work of god. another example, up until about 200 years ago(just an estimate), people thought that diseases were punishments from god and came directly from god. we now know that microorganisms cause disease, not god.. it is possible that god causes this, but all your work is still ahead of you in proving so.



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Village Idiot
I think the whole problem started when adam and eve ate from the tree of ignorance

imho


Is that the tree that creationists keep eating from?



posted on Jun, 10 2012 @ 10:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheCelestialHuman
reply to post by InfoKartel
 
the laws of gravity for example, a supreme being/creator is not needed for gravity to work


And how would you explain the origin of gravity without it being intelligent design? There's just such an infinitesimal chance that the force of gravity happens to be the perfect value to sustain life on this planet that just so happens to be the perfect distance from the sun as to be able to support so many varied life forms. On a planet that just happens to perfectly orbit our sun and just happens to perfectly rotate on a schedule that allows us to be the most productive. Oh yeah, and the fact that primordial soup just happened to combine perfectly to in a combination of billions of DNA not just once, but enough times for procreation to happen.

I understand those who are skeptical of Intelligent Design. But there's just way too many things that "just happened perfectly" for me to think that somehow this beautiful planet and these millions of complex organisms exploded from nothingness and that everything was completely random.





new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join