This blog is an attempt to defend the concept of Intelligent Design from the many left-wingers who insist that it's a conceptual lackey of the Religious Right and that it's actually a form of Creationism.
First, perhaps I should explain that I am an evolutionary creationist. I believe in the scientific explanation of the origin of the universe and the life forms within it, i.e., that what we know of as reality is the result of a primal explosion known as the Big Bang and that life evolved slowly over the course of billions of years into its current forms through a process known as evolution. However, I also believe that the various stories of creation by the religions of the world actually describe the Big Bang and evolution in symbolic terms. Hence, the Evolution vs. Creationism argument may well be moot. For those who follow the Biblical story of creation, the statement that God created the universe in seven days may actually be describing cosmic units of vast stretches of time in metaphorical language rather than seven days as we mortals measure a week. What would the concept of time be to an immortal being of ultimate consciousness? Obviously, quite different from our own experience. The Biblical scholars described God's point of view in a manner in which we mortals could comprehend, including mathematical units of time that we could readily identify with.
Now, as for Intelligent Design. Yes, it's true that many right-wing Christian zealots support its introduction in the classroom. Yes, it's true that many of them probably consider this an underhanded means of sneaking Creationist rhetoric into the science classes. However, I do not believe that Intelligent Design is a version of Creationism because it does not suggest that the universe was created according to Biblical literalism, or in a way that says the various stories of creation found in world religion occurred literally as described in mythology. Rather, it suggests that there was a guiding, intelligent hand behind the creation of the universe and the process of evolution.
Personally, I do not believe that life as intricate as the forms we see on Earth today (and probably elsewhere in the universe) was the result of random chance, as scientists say. Atheists, like scientists, insist that the universe has no conscious aspect to it and that evolution occurred entirely at random, with no guiding hand at all. This just doesn't seem likely nor logical to me. That is like finding a device as intricate and complex as a wristwatch on the sand and insisting that it was constructed entirely at random. Yes, proponents of a non-conscious universe will argue that this isn't a good comparison because wristwatches are made of metal and life forms are composed of organic materials, but I think the comparison is apt because it would appear that every device we are familiar with needs a designer. What else are life forms but complex machines made out of carbon-based materials? As such, I challenge the notion that the universe and everything in it, particularly forms of life and sentience of the sort that humans have, was created entirely at random by forces that had no consciousness to them whatsoever.
Is there evidence for Intelligent Design? Or, I should say, enough evidence that science professors can justify mentioning it in the classroom? That would depend on how one views evolution. Is there evidence that machinery needs to have an intelligent designer? Yes, there is, so why should life as we know it be an exception to this rule? Atheists have an ideology that there is no conscious aspect to the universe, and thus they insist that evolution must be random because if we acknowledge that the universe must be a conscious entity and that life as we know it had a designer then this would validate religion. Hence, their rejection of Intelligent Design is entirely based upon ideological grounds, and not anything that has to do with science or rationality, as they claim. They simply loathe any idea or principle that they feel is related to or evocative of religion. I believe that the idea of a consciousness to the universe should be readily explored by science and that if it was there would be no great need for religion in the world. Religion is simply one tool for exploring the mysteries of the universe that science refuses to comment on, and this is why religion remains a force to be reckoned with in the world today.
Of course, there is no way to prove Intelligent Design under scientific experimentation today. However, I think the evidence can be seen in observing the multi-faceted complexity of life and noting how elegantly everything pieces together. Obviously, if an intelligent designer is behind life, it's a much more advanced type of intelligence than human intelligence, something much higher, something on a cosmic scale. And until we fully understand the nature of consciousness in the universe, we shouldn't rule out Intelligent Design and we shouldn't allow the Religious Right to have the equivalent of ownership rights on the concept. I fully believe in the creation of the universe and evolution as described by science; I simply question whether or not it occurred over the course of billions of years as the result of complete random chance.
