Thought Exercise: What Would Happen if Intelligent Design Became a Real Science

[Wowbagger]

Let us assume, for the time being, that uncontroversial evidence was found, for an Intelligent Designer. Maybe we discovered the original blue-prints of various life forms, and the labs they were created in. Maybe something even more dramatic than that: Actual communications with the Designer. Or, less dramatic, such as a label embedded in every cell, with writing that says "Designed by God, Inspected By #17".

We are not going to discuss how one would actually verify such evidence, here. For the purposes of this exercise, we are going to assume it has already been widely accepted, by most scientists, including all major evolutionary biologists, as completely legitimate.

How would that change our world?

Very broadly, it would completely change how we do medical research, of course. We can refer back to our blue-prints to study how diseases come about, instead of trying to estimate evolutionary pathways. We could even re-engineer life forms, to make up for flaws in the original design. Imagine something like a Human Being Version 2.0.

That, again, was very broad. Perhaps some of you can come up with some specific, little details about what would happen, if Intelligent Design (as an origin-of-life theory) became a real science?

(By the way, if anyone wants to argue that I.D. already is a real science, please do so in another thread. You can link to it, here. And, I will gladly take you on that challenge.)

 

[slingblade]

"Goddidit" would be an acceptable answer, and science would stultify under it. To what extent, I don't know. But I can't see it as a good thing, overall.

 

[critterrice]

Well I suppose it would mean that MRSA's don't evolve so we could be irresponsible with our antibiotics and stop washing our hands. Whoopee.

 

[Akhenaten]

Billions and billions of warranty claims.

 

[Wowbagger]

"Goddidit" would be an acceptable answer, and science would stultify under it. To what extent, I don't know. But I can't see it as a good thing, overall.

But, we would know something about God Himself, and/or how God "didit". That presents a new realm of knowledge to acquire. Science would not stultify, at least not for long. It would simply build new models, in a different direction, than it did before!



ETA: And, the Designer doesn't necessarily need to be God, anyway.... it could be aliens.

 

[wollery]

Let us assume, for the time being, that uncontroversial evidence was found, for an Intelligent Designer. Maybe we discovered the original blue-prints of various life forms, and the labs they were created in. Maybe something even more dramatic than that: Actual communications with the Designer. Or, less dramatic, such as a label embedded in every cell, with writing that says "Designed by God, Inspected By #17".

We are not going to discuss how one would actually verify such evidence, here. For the purposes of this exercise, we are going to assume it has already been widely accepted, by most scientists, including all major evolutionary biologists, as completely legitimate.

How would that change our world?

Porcine aviation would ensue.

 

[slingblade]

But, we would know something about God Himself, and/or how God "didit". That presents a new realm of knowledge to acquire. Science would not stultify, at least not for long. It would simply build new models, in a different direction, than it did before!

For some. I fear that many would simply say "goddidit, and that's good enough for me," and settle for ignorance about a lot of things.

ETA: And, the Designer doesn't necessarily need to be God, anyway.... it could be aliens.

Except you said "Inspected by God," so I figured you were talking about god.
Wanna bring those goalposts back over here?

 

[Dave Rogers]

In science-based industries, as deadlines approached with no realistic chance of meeting them by our own efforts, we would give up trying and resort to prayer instead.

But then again, that already happens.

Dave

 

[AkuManiMani]

On the upside we would have the master blueprints for how the designer(s) did it and use that information for medicine and biological engineering. The problems we would be left with is why the designer(s) played such a nasty prank by making it really look like organisms evolved, and where the designer(s) came from to begin with.

 

[Dancing David]

"Goddidit" would be an acceptable answer, and science would stultify under it. To what extent, I don't know. But I can't see it as a good thing, overall.

Well SB, I am not sure that ID means a god is needed and that would be the first thing studied. Was it god or aliens in a time machine?

Wowbagger, is this diety ID in the evidence or is the evidence ambiguos?

ETA: Ooops I see that this has been clarified and modified.

 

[Dancing David]

On the upside we would have the master blueprints for how the designer(s) did it and use that information for medicine and biological engineering. The problems we would be left with is why the designer(s) played such a nasty prank by making it really look like organisms evolved, and where the designer(s) came from to begin with.

I am not sure the blue prints on a poorly designed house would always help. There are times you would be grateful to know where things were but the why would still be dumbfounding.


And perhaps the ID is proof that it started with design and evolution occured from there.

 

[Ocelot]

But, we would know something about God Himself, and/or how God "didit". That presents a new realm of knowledge to acquire. Science would not stultify, at least not for long. It would simply build new models, in a different direction, than it did before!

That's what I was going to say. Much of the detail of course would depend upon how precisely ID was proven and of course on whether the designer was extant and contactable.

To allow for consisancy with current observations I feel that a productive area of research would be in attempting to contact this designer and wake him up.

 

[AkuManiMani]

I am not sure the blue prints on a poorly designed house would always help. There are times you would be grateful to know where things were but the why would still be dumbfounding.


And perhaps the ID is proof that it started with design and evolution occured from there.

My answer to ID'ers is that its simpler to think of life as an evolving intelligence that designs itself with the environment acting to prune out the designs that don't work. As soon as one postulates an external designer they are left with having to explain how that designer came to be, and so on. Either way one wants to look at it one comes to the same conclusion: life comes from life /shrug

 

[Cavemonster]

Here's the biggest danger in this scenario.
If there is some alien or whatever "designer" then a whole branch of investigation opens up that explores that designer directly, their intentions and process, as a way of gaining knowledge about life by understanding the origins.

If that designer is really something that could be called a "god" then you get into all this religious nonsense that it is wrong to try to question or investigate "God's Mystery"

 

[Ron_Tomkins]

Thought Exercise: What Would Happen if Intelligent Design Became a Real Science

Then Theists and woos in general would, in disappointment, look for another non verifiable, fantasy based explanation for the meaning of it all

 

[Nonpareil]

A huge trial, with God as the defendant. Humans would sue him for all the crappy stuff. And probably win, too. We control the courts!

 

[Foster Zygote]

Porcine aviation would ensue.

And the umbrella industry would flourish.

 

[Gate2501]

This is an interesting question.

I would say that discerning the nature of the designer would be first priority. Another physical being or race of beings would be more likely than a supernatural god I would think, then again some would classify this being(s) as god regardless.

It would also be worth looking into whether the same evidence of design existed outside of living organisms. A sim universe type scenario.

 

[Beerina]

If they're gonna be liking science and prove there's a designer, then they have to go whole hog.

Looking around at all the pain and terror and sorrow and death, it's obvious that this designer is incompetent, evil, or a complete ass. Scientifically.

 

[itlallburn]

If you think about it, your premise is not a new one to some. But given knowledge of your designer, would it not be logical to seek out his/her person(s) for the path to truth and greater knowledge? Would this not be the very first step?