If there is a noosphere - and in some way there must be - it implies a principle of intelligence in the universe higher than the inorganic and organic realms though not necessarily excluding them. By this principle of intelligence, in which we participate, we discover truths, or "laws of nature", which we subsequently prove through practical application of those laws (e.g., technology). Through this process of scientific discovery and application we infer that there is something essential to the universe which complements and responds to our own intelligence. When science progresses, our understanding of the universe progresses incrementally, or, more rarely, in radical or revolutionary ways.
When I hear the term "intelligent design", I think it would be a suitable, slightly poetic term to denote this principle. "Design" would represent the order of the universe, to the extent that we have so far understood it and project that we might increase our understanding, its coming-into-being (or its eternal existence, if you will), and even its "chaos" - a word we often use to mean that which we do not yet understand. The principle of intelligence is understood as being greater than the sum of the individual intelligences of each and every human being - and other living creatures. This is again confirmed by our successful applications of the results of our creative mental activity on the natural world, of which we are, of course, a part.
In this sense the term "intelligent design" could be acceptable to members of just about any religion which does not preach the destruction of science, as well as by agnostics and aetheists - apart from hardcore absurdist existentialists. However, it seems that the term is the property of Christian creationists who use it as a quasi-scientific smokescreen for literal interpretation of the creation story in the book of Genesis. As they have a de facto copyright to the term, I guess I will probably have to leave it to them and chalk it up to another victory for the use of words to suggest the opposite of what they seem to mean.
Monday, November 5, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment