Intelligent design paper

In Support of Intelligent Design

Joshua Plovanic

October 12, 2015

    If you are curious about the nature and origin of life in the universe, you are almost certainly aware of the philosophical and scientific debates surrounding this vast and complex topic. Fields such as biology, chemistry, astronomy, physics, theology, and the philosophical fields of study all touch, in some form or aspect, on the simple questions of how, where, why, and when did life and consciousness emerge and come into being, both on this planet and elsewhere in this quite inconceivably large existence in which we reside. The answer to these questions have been and may always be shrouded in ambiguity and uncertainty, and may very well be up for debate and discussion for the remainder of our species’ existence. Ambiguity and uncertainty are no excuse for not attempting to understand both your personal reality and heritage and the reality you share with countless conscious beings who reside in the same existence you do. You are, from a certain perspective, a conscious world who resides in a world with other conscious worlds in a universe with possibly countless potential worlds with conscious worlds residing on those worlds. Regarding this statement, the possibility of an intelligent consciousness with the power to make thought and ideas into substance can be considered as a possible explanation of the origins of life and existence in general. In other words, an all-powerful consciousness conceived of and made material this existence. The reason for this cosmic conception is for consciousness to have substance and systems to both interact with and occupy.

    Although there is some acrimony present in the debate between intelligent design and evolution, I do not believe that the differences between the two theories are irreconcilable. The particular attempt at reconciliation between these two ideas that I ascribe to is entitled “guided evolution.” In short, guided evolution acknowledges the overwhelming and substantial evidence that supports and validates the theory of evolution, and also acknowledges the possibility of an intelligent entity or consciousness being present in this process.

The guiding entity that I believe played, and continues to play, a significant role in the development and origin of life allows the natural process of evolution to take course, and only interferes in order to protect the assigned path that this consciousness wants life to take, “nudging” it in the appropriate direction, so to speak. I believe it did this in order to ensure that an advanced creature like ourselves could evolve from this process and develop the appropriate sophistication of the body and brain for an advanced consciousness to have the appropriate vessel by which to occupy and act through. In support of this thesis, I would argue in favor of William Paley’s view, in which complex systems of life and the advanced state of many of these systems begs for a designer or guide. Take for example the highly developed human brain. It allows for complex functions to be performed, complex analysis of information and data to be done, and our minds can comprehend some of the most intriguing mysteries of our existence and come up with amazing and mind-blowing explanations of these mysteries. Even if some these explanations are fantastical or unsubstantiated, the fact that our brains allow for such complex thoughts and ideas to be formulated is impressive in its own right.

I do believe that we are creatures of this earth with the same genetic and biological heritage of all other life. Origination of heritage is hard to determine with precision, primarily because our species, obviously, was not in existence at this particular landmark moment in the history of life on this planet. That being said, since we cannot pinpoint exactly where and how this event unfolded, it is incredibly difficult for our species to come to the groundbreaking and world-shaking conclusion as to the nature of how this miraculous event happened in the way that it did, especially given the fact that we have a particularly difficult time replicating the recipe and conditions necessary for the development of life. When I described it as a miraculous event, I was using that word both figuratively and literally. The odds of this event happening the way that it did and the following evolution of life on this planet into what it is today, including ourselves in the process, seem to be an utter impossibility that was realized in an astounding and brilliantly fortunate way. This fact leads me to the conclusion that a consciousness, whether extra-terrestrial or in some other form that we haven’t encountered yet or have the current inability to comprehend, guided this process and may have even initiated it.

    As controversial and philosophically incredible as this thesis, it is not without objection or criticism. A worldwide renowned biologist by the name of Richard Dawkins, who is also an ardent atheist and critic of divine guidance or design, would be and mostly is against the idea of guided evolution. He sees the notion of an intelligent designer or guide as both unrealistic and unnecessary. Natural empirical and scientific processes, such as the laws of physics and the chemical reactions and processes that happen in biology are sufficient to explain the evolution and origin of life. Dawkins refers to the notion of a divine creator as fiction, especially the biblical divinity, stating “the God of the Old Testament is the most unpleasant character in all of fiction.” This statement suggests at the notion that a divine creator is destructive and  unpleasant, while also unwittingly implies that the notion of a divine creator itself is a destructive and unpleasant notion. I would disagree with him on both the thoughts that suggest an intelligent force is both unrealistic and unnecessary. I would disagree with him on the grounds that consciousness is not fully understood yet, and may take on dynamics and characteristics that we have not encountered in our short span of knowledge and understanding of the subject. The idea of a powerful consciousness, whether it is extraterrestrial life or another unencountered form of consciousness or intelligence incomprehensible to us in our current state of advancement, guiding and initiating life on this planet and/or elsewhere in the universe may not be as unrealistic of an idea as Dawkins may have it be. Also, the notion of it being unnecessary may not be entirely accurate. A Paleyesque argument against this notion would be how seemingly perfect the conditions are for the development and evolution of life into intelligent life that we have in our stellar vicinity, including our sun and the stable planetary system we reside in. Even from a historical standpoint, we are extremely lucky that we haven’t wrought upon the earth nuclear annihilation and the total destruction of earth’s biosphere by the weapons and technology we have developed in the last century, which may hint at a possible intervention from an unseen force of consciousness. It may also be possible that the enlightenment of the world’s actors to the possibility of a common destruction may have been brought upon by an advanced consciousness of sorts.

Alongside my disagreement with Dawkin’s notions, I don’t agree with all conceptions of intelligent design either. My version of intelligent design does not consider irreducible complexity as a valid factor in my theory. Irreducible complexity is defined by Michael J. Behe as “a single system which is composed of several interacting parts, and where the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to cease functioning.” (Behe, 1996)  My argument against this idea is that although a complex organ or function of life may cease to function if a piece of it is missing or malfunctioning, the fact remains that an ancestral organism of that creature may have a simpler system or organ that does not have that piece you took away from the organ or function of the more complex organism, yet it still functions the way it evolved to do so.

William Dembski, an American theologian, most definitely believes this intelligence is the divine creator known simply as “God.” He discusses the concept of the vestiges in creation, or “footprints of God.” He distinguishes between intelligently and unintelligently designed objects, but specifies how inferring that “an intelligent agent caused something is not [prescribing] how an intelligent agent caused it. In particular, design in this last sense is separate from miracle.” (Dembski, 2010, p 528). I will not be audacious and attempt to lay claim to how life began, but my audacity will extend to why it began. Dembski clearly infers “divine” guidance if he were to indorse the theory of guided evolution. I wouldn’t necessarily infer divinity, just highly advanced intelligence or consciousness of some sort that shrouds itself in obscurity and may have a complexity about it that we may not be able to comprehend at our current level of sophistication.

It may very well be divine in nature, sharing what I call infinite complexity, an advanced state that can process an infinite array of ideas and has the power, by which we, being the subject of its creation, cannot possibly comprehend, to make those ideas into substance. An infinitely complex consciousness can comprehend all aspects of existence, which in itself may also be infinite, the product of a conceptualization of an infinitely complex intelligence. The “why” of our conception is, I believe, simply for the pleasure and experience of existence for this consciousness. It allowed us to evolve so that it can occupy a substantial body and interact with its creation from within its creation, solely for its pleasure and solely to experience. It plays simple and advanced games with its creation, some for fun, and some for its glorification. Some of these games and experience it indulges itself in are not always fun, but they often always have a purpose, whether to learn lessons or learn the value of companionship, love, and the beautiful and rewarding experience of overcoming adversity and difficult challenges to gain strength and fortitude. This philosophy is very speculative, and obviously difficult to prove. My only comparison to a tangible example is how human beings interact with each other, the games that we play, the difficult or glorious experience we have, and the thoughts that we conceive of. If we are indeed the guided fruition of evolution by an advanced consciousness, we are indeed created in its image, with the simple purpose of existing in creation to experience the wonder of existence.

Sources:

Behe, M., “A Series of Eyes” Discovery Institute, August 10, 1996

Dembski, W., “Reinstating Design Within Science” Philosophy Of Religion 2010

Dawkins, R. “The blind Watchmaker” 1987