The Intelligent Designer: A Most Unintelligent Concept
For readers who are unacquainted with the concept of Intelligent Design, the reasoning behind the proposition of Intelligent Design goes something like this:
- Life on Earth is far too complicated to have arisen from simple mechanisms, particular the simple (and blind) mechanism of Darwinian selection.
- Therefore it must have arisen from something that is itself more complex than life on Earth.
- The something we will term “The Intelligent Designer”.
Any serious scientific discussion is prepared to question everything. This is not limited to just the results of experiments, for example, but also question the validity of experimental methods and indeed the purpose of science itself. (As an aside, anybody who asserts that people who argue scientifically accept science “in blind faith” are woefully ignorant of the scientific method, and are crazy to think that they have anything useful to contribute in this arena.)
Given this, it is then perfectly legitimate for scientists to then ask “Who (or what) designed the Intelligent Designer?”. The response of people who feel threatened by this question is “That is not a legitimate question!”, which demonstrates their inability to engage in any meaningful philosophical or scientific discussion. Such individual almost always go on to cite their own holy book, giving reasons (and arguments) as to why that book is correct. This is pure folly on their part, of course, because they have already discredited their own ability to think in the eyes of their audience.
From my own observations, such people, like the poor, will always be with us. It is pointless trying to make them think coherently: their cognitive dissonance is an addiction in their lives. The task of free thinkers is ensure that the damage inflicted on society by such individuals is minimised as much as possible.