Today, I was talking to a friend of mine about my life’s ups and downs; as of this moment, it is more the later than the former. My friend did not blurt out that there is a god and I should worship his god-head accordingly. Instead, he told me to not worry so much because there is ” a cosmic intelligence” out there that will teach me the meaning of it all.
Like politicians, theists are masters at the art of rhetoric. Despite his intention, my friend meant to say that life is “complex.” Furthermore, my friend implied that since the universe we inhabit is too difficult to decipher, then there must be an “intelligent designer-” a deified Steven Spielberg who writes, directs, and produces the ultimate existential blockbuster that is life. There is a god, in other words. I respectfully disagree.
Indeed for a parental-like god to exist, life must be what intelligent design proponents call “irreducibly complex” If you followed the PA intelligent design trial back in 2005, you will be familiar with the term. If not let me briefly explain: IC means that in order to any one thing to function, all of its parts must work in harmony with one another and that’s it- there is no room for defects. If one spring pops up, not only the Thing is no more, but the Designer holding it together ceases to be; this is because in order for the Designer to be existent, in most fill in the gaps.
Such careless dearth of logic is consistent with modern Judeo-CChristian theology. For example, mankind would be entirely damned if Jesus was not the messiah and did not die for our sins.
Under such do-or-die rules many things we take for granted woud exist, paradoxly enough, in an ontological purgatory- floating in the abyss between the real and imaginary. The Human Eye is an excellent example and Richard Dawkins give a great illustration of it in his book, The Blind Watchmaker. But since you took the trouble to read this post, allow me to give my own illustration in the next paragraph.
The human eye is composed of various parts and indeed various complexities too exhaustive to full explain here. However, let’s examine the basic anatomic outline. There’s the scelera, the pupil, the iris, the lens, and the retina. According to intelligent design, all of these parts (and those not mentioned here) are all supposed to work in synchronization.
Anyone who has a grandparents is aware that is not the case. Cataracts, according to the American Optometric Association, develops when ” clouding of the lens” parciptates ”changes in the proteins and lens fibers.” And yet, contrary to ID, a pair of cataract eyes still work; the eyes are blurry, but the inflicted viewer can still see(although he should get surgery). Even if the surgery is only 80% successful, the viewer can still see; that is because the parts of his eyes are adapting to change. Such is evidence, if only a minor one, of human evolution. That’s right- that evil monkey theory does explain why we can see after moderate eye surgery, not die when having the flu, and still retain brain cells after a wild weekend in Las Vegas. Go figure.
But intelligent design goes further. There is an implication that things that are not “irreducibly complex” should perceived as evil. For far too long, sexuality was deemed as IC. As man, you fell in love with a woman(preferably a virgin), married her and had kids. Then you got the job in order to take care of your family. Since you made money from doing well at your job, you gave your wife spending money and thus boosting the economy. It also did not help to be a member of a church.
Even before the 1960’s, sexuality was never that tightly defined. Even in the bible, there are patriarchs who are made to multiple women or have a lover on the side, without fear of devine impunity. The first sex-change operation was in 1959. Yet, those who did not conform to the dominant sexual life style were either imprisoned, considered mentally ill, or were killed. Why? It was because homosexuality proved to IC proponent that a man can function as a healthy, lawful human being without being attracted to women. Of course back then, IC proponents were called “creationists.”
So there you have it. No matter what changes occur in your life or society as a whole, we can all adapt. Maybe we would not have “the Answer” to guide us, but we will adapt- ”we will get by” to quote a Grateful Dead lyric. And for those who insist that cannot smile without a “cosmic intelligence”, just consider the following: We, like the stars above, are composed of atoms.
