More on the Kitzmiller Intelligent Design case, and on Intelligent Design

"Intelligent Design," like most phrases, means more than one thing.

A person who believes in intelligent design (id, in lower-case italics, for this post) believes that some entity designed some or all of the various properties of, and entities in the universe. For example, one might believe that a supernatural being designed the properties of atoms, such as Carbon. This supernatural being might or might not be the God of Christianity and Judaism. All people I would classify as Christians believe in id. There are certainly great differences in details -- some believe that God designed the universe in such a way that it would naturally emerge in its present form from the Big Bang, others believe that God specially designed and created each type of living organism. Some believe that the earth is only a few thousands of years old, others that it is much older than that. Some believe that God used seemingly random processes to bring about His purposes, some do not. Persons who believe in id do not belong to any particular organization, and do not generally act in concert. However, they are united in believing that neither the universe, nor humans, are here as the result of purposeless chance.

Another meaning of the term is the Intelligent Design Movement (ID). ID adherents do have a central organization, the Discovery Institute. They subscribe to id, but also have more specific beliefs, as follows:
1. It is possible to demonstrate supernatural design scientifically.
2. Intelligent Design should be taught in the public schools, in science classes.
3. Teaching Intelligent Design in public school science classes is an effective way for Christians to combat atheism.
All who are in the ID movement subscribe to id.

Many Christians, some of them scientists, some of them theologians, believe in id, but disagree with ID. They do not subscribe to any of the 3 specific beliefs listed above. For one thing, some of them they may believe that the Bible, itself, indicates that specific belief 1 is incorrect. For another, they see that the protection the US Constitution provides against state sponsorship of any particular religious belief is important, and that implementing specific belief 2 would violate that. The ID movement often seems to be deceptive, in that it attempts to identify itself with young-earth creationism, although the two are not the same thing. It also seems to be deceptive, in that, although specific belief 3 is well-documented, and spoken of as a strategy by leaders of the ID movement, they sometimes deny it, at least when in court.

The Kitzmiller case, although not tried by the US Supreme Court, rejected an attempt to carry out specific belief 2.

A blog I subscribe to, by a Christian author, discussed the deliberate deception, while under oath, of an official of the Foundation for Thought and Ethics, an organization claiming to be Christian, and closely allied with the Discovery Institute. You can read that discussion here.

Thanks for reading.

Patriotism/partisanship: not always a good idea

The Free Dictionary's definition of patriotism says, succinctly: "a devoted love, support, and defense of one’s country. . ." The Wikipedia article on the subject is here. A partisan is defined thus: "A fervent, sometimes militant supporter or proponent of a party, cause, faction, person, or idea." There is a Wikipedia article on Partisan.

Patriotism, or partisanship, can sometimes be a good thing, I guess, as, for example, when the Jews, or slaves in the US, helped each other against oppression and injustice. But, clearly, such devotion to country, ethnic group, tribe, political party and the like, can go way too far, and often has, leading to various kinds of evil, including war. Some church congregations or denominations will not display a US flag, perhaps because of the evils perpetrated in the name of various forms of partisanship or patriotism.

There is a terrible example of this in the book of Judges. Chapters 19-20 tell the story of how the men of one town in the tribe of Benjamin performed a horrible crime, or several such. The residents of Gibeah were not hospitable to a man passing through, then, later, wanted to sexually assault him, and, finally, sexually assaulted his concubine, so terribly that she died. When the rest of the Israelites demanded that the criminals be turned over for punishment, the entire tribe of Benjamin refused, even though the majority of them had no part in the crime, and, after the Benjamites killed many from the other tribes, the men of the tribe were almost completely wiped out.

Some actions should not be supported or defended, even if carried out by my country, my political party, my extended family, my socio-economic group.

Is it easy to go against your own group? No, of course not. But sometimes it is necessary.

Fortune and Fate, by Sharon Shinn

I have previously posted about Sharon Shinn's Twelve Houses novels, Mystic and Rider and The Thirteenth House. (This is Shinn's web site.)

I have not posted on the last three of these books, which are Dark Moon Defender, Reader and Raelynx, and Fortune and Fate. To summarize briefly, Dark Moon Defender describes an evil woman, politically powerful, Coralinda Giseltess, who has been able to almost stamp out mystics -- people born with various magical powers, such as being able to start fires, or change into an animal's shape. In Reader and Raelynx -- a raelynx is a large solitary feline predator -- her rebellion unites with that of the leaders of two of the provinces of the land, one of them her brother, the other, Rayson Fortunalt. They nearly overthrow the kingdom, and do succeed in killing the king. In the process, it becomes clear that Coralinda herself has been using magical powers. Finally, all three of these rebel leaders are killed. Amalie, the young daughter of the king marries Cammon, a mystic who can Read -- that is, he can read the minds of other people.

Throughout the books, new people, with new mystical powers, are introduced.

There is a religion in Shinn's sub-creation, and the characters believe in supernatural goddesses, and these goddesses are real, in this fictional world. A character says that she has seen two of them during the battles in Reader and Raelynx.

There is another interesting aspect, relating to religion, in fact to Christianity (although there is no reference to Christianity in the book). A bit of background first.

The action in Fortune and Fate makes up two separate stories. (Fortune is the name of the capital building of Fortunalt). In one of them, Wen, a King's Rider who was present when the King was killed, cannot forgive herself. (It wasn't her fault.) She leaves the capital, resigning from the Riders, and wanders around the country without any real goal, leaving any situation that looks like she might make new friends. She does rescue several people who are in danger, using her intelligence and her military skills. She finds herself in Fortunalt, and takes on the job of developing a competent guard force for the young heiress of that House. Meanwhile, the other story is that Cammon, the consort of the Queen, takes a very slow tour of the land, with a large entourage.

Near the end of the book, the two threads are tied together, when Cammon and his entourage come to Fortunalt. Here's a key conversation, between Senneth and Tayse, the main characters in the series, who are part of Cammon's escort:
"Whatever reason he had for making this trip. Was it really to tour the southern lands and try to determine how safe they would be for Amalie to visit? Was it to gain some consensus from the Twelve House overseers about putting together a mixed force to patrol the borders? Or was it to find Wen?"
She sat up straighter in bed. "Surely not even Cammon would believe such a long and expensive journey could be justified by the idea fo finding one lost soul?"
"I actually think it's the only sort of prize Cammon really thinks is worthwhile."
"But -- but -- all this time -- and all these people! Nine Riders and seventy guards! The dinners, the bills at the inns! All to locate a missing woman?" (Sharon Shinn, Fortune and Fate. New York: Ace, 2008. P. 351.)

Yes, Cammon went to a great deal of trouble and expense to make sure that Wen, who, although a friend, is not a special one, is able to forgive herself, and find a useful role in life. Does that remind me of anyone? Of course! Jesus did that, too, on an even larger scale, and not in fiction. He traveled here from Heaven, so that I could be forgiven, and find a useful role in life, regardless of the cost.

Thanks for reading.

Sunspots 217

Things I have recently spotted that may be of interest to someone else:

Science:
Slate on why doctors have worn white coats for decades (if not centuries). The American Medical Association is recommending that they do not wear them anymore.

Computing:
Wired, on why you can't find Facebook stuff through a Google search.

Literature:
Elizabeth Moon on why bad books succeed.

Philosophy:
John Lynch on the history of the idea of design in nature -- which, as he points out, is not the same as the history of the Intelligent Design movement.

Christianity:
From USA Today, an editorial on the evidence for the existence of God, and on the evidence for out-of-body experiences. (The writer believes in both.)

Image source (public domain)

Science as Recipe thinking

I was once asked to give a talk on science to our Children's Church. Here, with slight modifications, is what I told them:

Do you like hamburgers? I do, usually.

If someone makes a hamburger, what do they need? A recipe. Well, they probably don’t look on a piece of paper to see what to do, but they have a recipe in their head, or somewhere. And a recipe for hamburger probably works well. Besides how to make a hamburger, there may be other questions on the mind of the cook. For example, she might worry about not having enough money to buy hamburger meat. She might worry about whether it is wrong to kill cows to make hamburger meat. She might worry about a person in their family who is allergic to wheat flour, so can’t eat a hamburger bun. She might worry about what a hamburger means. None of those thoughts are in the recipe, whether in the head, or written down.

Science is a lot like recipe thinking. It is about what things are made of, how they work, and how they are put together. Scientists can try out things, like trying out new stuff in a recipe. But there is a kind of non-recipe thinking, about higher stuff. There are two big words for this kind of thinking—theology and philosophy. Theology is thinking about God, and philosophy is thinking about what is true, and how we know things. Science can tell us what a rock is made of, and maybe where it came from, but it can’t tell us why there are rocks in the world.

Your pastor asked me here to talk about creation. Creation is about how the world came to be here, how living things came to be here, and how people came to be here. Science can give us recipe thinking about how the world is put together, how living things work, and how humans work. But this recipe thinking can’t tell us why, or what it means. I need higher, non-recipe thinking.

The most important question about how the world, living things, and humans came to be is this one: Are we here by chance, or on purpose? This question isn’t recipe thinking. It is higher thinking. If your school science books say that they can tell you about whether the world, living things, or humans are here by chance or not, they are wrong. They can’t do it. You need higher thinking for that.

Before I discuss this further, I want to point out a danger: thinking that the Bible says things that it doesn’t really say. For instance, a man named Galileo said that the earth goes around the sun. Others said that the Bible says that the sun goes around the earth. It seems to, because it was written by people who believed that, and God allowed them to put their thoughts in the Bible, but the Bible doesn’t really say that the earth goes around the sun, or that the sun goes around the earth.

Some people think that the Bible says that the world is only a few thousand years old. The earth may be only a few thousand years old, but the Bible doesn’t say so—people do. Some people think that the flood in Noah’s time caused almost all the rock formations and mountains all over the world. Maybe, maybe not. The Bible isn’t really clear on that. But to argue that the Bible is clear on this, or other ideas that it is not clear on, is dangerous.

Back to the difference between recipe thinking and higher thinking.

Recipe Thinking (Science)
Take hamburger meat, made into patties, lettuce, tomato and cheese slices, mayonnaise, ketchup, and hamburger buns made from wheat flour.
Fry patties until done, then place in buns with other ingredients.

Higher Thinking (Theology & Philosophy)
Can I afford hamburger meat?
Is it wrong to kill cows?
Is my child allergic to wheat flour?
What does a hamburger mean?
These questions are important, but not part of a recipe.

Let us compare chance and purpose:

Chance: 1) Your underwear is on your foot, there's a blue sock on your left hand, a handkerchief on your head, your pants are on your right arm, and there's a brown sock on your right ear.
2) The world is just here. It has no purpose or meaning. The same is true of living things and human beings.

Purpose: 1)Underwear, socks, handkerchief, pants, in the usual places, because someone thought about it and planned it that way.
2) The world is here because God planned it. So are living things and human beings.

Are thoughts about whether we are here because of chance or purpose recipe thoughts or higher thoughts?

They are higher thoughts. Scientists can think about them, but so can you or I, or a truck driver. Scientists’ thoughts about these things are no more likely to be right than anyone else’s.

Two dangers:
1) I repeat one I discussed above: don’t claim that the Bible says something that it doesn’t say. (The Bible doesn’t say how old the earth is, or what the first people looked like, or how long ago the first people lived.) There's another danger.
2) Don’t claim that science’s recipe thinking can answer questions needing higher thinking. Science can't prove that there was a purpose to creation, or disprove it.

We need both recipe thinking and higher thinking, but we need to be careful to distinguish the two kinds.

Similarities in organisms: designed or evolved?

Different organisms have similar properties, including appearance, and less obvious similarities, such as similarities between their DNA and proteins. The mainstream scientific explanation for such similarities is that the organisms are related by descent. Those who doubt that organisms which belong to different large taxonomic groupings, such as families -- humans and chimpanzees belong to the family Hominidae, but gibbons to the family Hylobatidae -- could have descended from a common ancestor argue that the similarities are there because the chemicals were designed to perform similar functions.

A recent post on the Panda's Thumb blog points out some weaknesses in the design explanation.

The post points out that marsupial organisms have biochemical similarities which seem to be based on common descent and relationship, rather than on their ecological niche. Thus, marsupial predators have molecules that resemble other marsupials far more than they resemble those of other predators.

The post also points out that non-functional, or "broken" genes show similarities which indicate common descent. Since they don't function, it's hard to believe that their resemblances are due to design to carry out a similar function.

Thanks for reading.

Unintentional sins

I have been under the impression that sin has to be intentional. Maybe so, but there is a whole chapter in the Old Testament about unintentional sin, namely Leviticus 4. (The ESV -- see previous link -- and the NIV use unintentional as their translation. The KJV uses "through ignorance." I don't see that that is a significant difference.)

This chapter commands a specific penalty for a priest, for a leader, for an ordinary member of the Israeli congregation, and for the congregation as a whole, if an unintentional sin is committed. As would be expected, the smallest penalty is for an ordinary member, and is a goat. The penalties for the others are larger, and would have been more expensive.

I'm not sure that the Bible explicitly defines sin at any point. The Wikipedia article on sin says that sin is the violation of some moral rule, usually a rule set forth by a deity. It also says that one of the frequent questions about sin is the matter of whether or not an unintentional act is a sin. The article says that there were three words for sin in Hebrew, cheit, pesha, and avon. Although the article claims that cheit is the word for unintentional sin, I checked in the Blueletter Bible, and found that a lot of sins that I would consider intentional were cheit, or a variant of it. This includes David's plan to have Uriah, Bathsheba's husband, murdered. In 2 Samuel 12:13, after Nathan the prophet details David's sins, David confesses, using chata, which I take to be a variant of cheit. Strong's Hebrew concordance says chata is used:

to sin, miss, miss the way, go wrong, incur guilt, forfeit, purify from uncleanness

Here's how Strong's concordance defines avon:

1) perversity, depravity, iniquity, guilt or punishment of iniquity

a) iniquity

b) guilt of iniquity, guilt (as great), guilt (of condition)

c) consequence of or punishment for iniquity

Pesha. It is most often translated as transgression in the KJV. Strong's concordance says that the definition is:

1) transgression, rebellion

a) transgression (against individuals)

b) transgression (nation against nation)

c) transgression (against God)

1) in general

2) as recognised by sinner

3) as God deals with it

4) as God forgives

d) guilt of transgression

e) punishment for transgression

f) offering for transgression

This same Wikipedia article says that, to a Christian, sin is "not following God's moral guidance." It also says that there is a Greek word, hamartia, which means "missing the mark," which is used in the New Testament for sin.

Whatever the definition of sin, it's not good, I shouldn't do it, and, if I find that I have, I should ask forgiveness. As John put it: 1 John 2:1 My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. 2 He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world. 3 And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments. (ESV)

Thanks for reading.

The 90% rule for marriage

You probably like about 90% of what your spouse is and does.

(If you figure out how to quantify this, let me know.)

Otherwise you probably wouldn't have married her/him in the first place. So, here's a rule to follow.

Be sure to praise, thank, or tell her/him about her dimple, his pleasing tone of voice, how well he fixes bouquets, how conscientiously she mows the grass, how carefully he keeps the checkbook, how well she fixed the bathroom leak, etc. -- in other words, something from the 90%, at least nine times, sincerely -- mean it -- for every complaint.

Try it. I'm going to try it, too. In fact, it's a life-long commitment.

That's probably part of 1 Corinthians 13 in action.

Thanks for reading.

Sunspots 216

Things I have recently spotted that may be of interest to someone else:

Science:
(or Mathematics, or Computing) A new Mersenne Prime number has been discovered, says NPR.

Slate on places to travel to for really good sleep .

Politics:
Robert Samuelson, economist, says that the healthcare plans being put forth by the Obama administration won't really cut costs.

"The political establishment's hubristic refusal to consider how other countries manage health care is encapsulated in the cliché 'uniquely American,' which is what Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., the lead legislator on health care reform, says he wishes his bill to be. . . . the finance committee Baucus chairs could find no place in this year's exhaustive health care hearings for a single expert on how other countries achieve better health outcomes for their populations while typically spending, on a per capita basis, half what we do." From Slate.

Image source (public domain)

Foster fatherhood -- and stepfatherhood

I don't believe that I had a foster father or a stepfather, although there is, I suppose, such a possibility. I share some characteristics with my father, and I never heard anything to suggest that he wasn't my "real," (meaning biological) father.

The Free Dictionary has this for its first entry for "father:"
1. A man who begets or raises or nurtures a child.

So, to the dictionary, a father is not only a biological father, but, possibly, a stepfather or foster father who has helped to raise or nurture a child, or, perhaps, even done it himself, with little or no help.

As far as I am aware, there is only one example of foster father- or stepfatherhood in the Bible, but it is a very important one, namely Joseph, Mary's husband, and the earthly father of Jesus.

Joseph did a remarkable thing. He married Mary, even though he knew she was pregnant, and he also knew that he wasn't the biological father of the baby she would bear. (See Matthew 1, which describes the manner in which Joseph discovered this fact.) As the Wikipedia puts it, Joseph is not mentioned much in the gospels, "in which he never speaks." Mary speaks, Jesus speaks to his parents, Joseph is given visions, but the Wikipedia is correct -- he never speaks. We have to infer his reaction.

God entrusted Joseph with important aspects of the care of His own Son. Matthew 2 tells us that it was Joseph, not Mary, who was divinely warned to flee to Egypt, and was told to return from Egypt.

Joseph is a great example of an apparently humble man, who did what he needed to do for his foster son, even, apparently, not telling others that Jesus wasn't his son. (Luke 3:23)

In this day and time, a lot of stepfathers, and foster fathers, have stepped up, as it were. They are doing a good, humble, patient job of raising and nurturing daughters and sons that aren't their biological offspring. God bless them, and help them.

Sunspots: A Google search for the words wicked stepmother returns about 169,000 web pages. A similar search for the words wicked stepfather returns less than 92,000. I can't think of a single fairy tale that has a wicked stepfather as a character, but there are several with wicked stepmothers. Why? I don't really know.

I work a little with elementary school children. I ran into a case in which a boy, about 10 years of age, was downright obsessive about his biological father. He told me that his stepfather was a good father, good to him. From what I could gather, his biological father was not -- he had not contacted the boy for months, including at Christmas and his birthday. Yet he was somehow longing for his "real" father, almost all the time. God help him, and others like him, and help fathers (and mothers) to be better at carrying out their responsibilities.

The Wikipedia article on Joseph says that the word τεκτων (Anglicized as tekton, which is probably related to the modern technician.) is used to describe his occupation. (Matthew 13:55). This word, it says, "cannot be translated narrowly; it evokes an artisan with wood in general, or an artisan in iron or stone." That same word is used to describe Jesus, Himself, in Mark 6:3.

Thanks for reading. If any fathers read this, be a good father, God helping you (and me). If any children of stepfathers or foster fathers read this, be sure to let them know how much you appreciate them.

2 comments:

Keetha Broyles said...

Greg was the inventor of our improvised grill and he said to tell you it was amazing - - - we were just sitting around and that grill evolved all by itself!!!

;-)

June 15, 2009

Martin LaBar said...

No intelligent design?

Note: This post got published, by mistake, on June 15th. I deleted it, and re-published, including a comment, and my response, this time, I hope, on the 21st, Father's Day.

Close-up or red lily, showing reproductive parts

This is an unretouched close-up of a lily flower. The six weiner-shaped objects are the anthers. As you can see, they were producing pollen when the photo was taken. They are, of course, held up by filaments. Together, the two parts make up stamens. The three-lobed object on the right, about halfway up, is a stigma. It is held up by a style, which connects the stigma to the ovary. (You can't see that in this photo.) The stigma is where pollen lands, and, if all goes well, fertilization will take place, resulting in an embryo in a seed, in the ovary.

The background consists of three petals, with three sepals, which look just like the petals in this flower, being outside the petals. You can see a sepal or two showing through. Isn't God a great artist? (Larger sizes should be available by clicking on the photo, if you wish to see more detail.)

I expect to be doing some family travel. I've got some posts scheduled to go out on the next two Sundays, and will probably be able to do a Sunspots on Wednesday, but, otherwise, I'm out of the blogging business for over a week.

Thanks for reading and/or looking. God's best to all of you.

Moral robots?

A recent book review is evidence that there are people (so far, not computers!) who are thinking about how to build a moral sense into robots, or teach them one.

Primatologist Frans de Waal has presented evidence, here and elsewhere, that non-human primates have at least a rudimentary moral sense.

See also this post, on the question of moral agency, which is the ability to make moral decisions.

Thanks for reading.

Christ Church, Philadelphia

The photo above shows the steeple of Christ Church, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA, arguably the most important church in the history of the US. The congregation, originally part of the Anglican Church, which became a congregation in 1695, built their first building on this site in 1696. From 1727-1744, a new building, the one shown, was constructed around the first one. The steeple you see contains building materials from the first church, which was torn down when it was possible to use the larger building for worship.

Fifteen signers of the Declaration of Independence attended this church, including Benjamin Franklin. Betsy Ross and George Washington also attended the church. There is a chandelier hanging from the ceiling of the church, with candles. We were told, when we visited the place, that the chandelier was lit for the wedding of Sarah Franklin, Benjamin Franklin's daughter, and that it was lit in May, 2009, for a current wedding. An active congregation meets in the building.

In 1785, the Episcopal church began in this building. We were told that the first African-American pastor of a major denomination was ordained to the ministry in this church.



The beautiful object above is the baptismal font of Christ Church. (You can see the rope, to keep tourists from touching it, in the foreground.) We were told that it is about 600 years old, and was sent from England in the early years of the church, for "as long as needed," when the church was still an Anglican one. William Penn, the founder of Pennsylvania, was baptized in the font as a baby, in England. (Penn was not an Episcopalian in later life, but a Quaker. He was born in 1644.)

We enjoyed our travel to, and in, the Philadelphia area last month.

Sunspots 215

Things I have recently spotted that may be of interest to someone else:

Humor:
"The little editor in your mind is no longer returning your calls, is he, Nona?" Sally Forth, syndicated comic strip, June 11, 2009.

Science:
Wired has a video on cleaning skulls, using flesh-eating beetles.

Slate on the long time for validation of the discovery of element 112 (which has not yet received its final name).

Politics:
William Saletan, of Slate, has some suggestions for pro-life and pro-choice advocates that might help them to come to agreement, on some topics related to abortion.

Sports:
With the NBA finals over, men's basketball on TV is on hiatus until November or so. I note that, of the ten normal starters of the Los Angeles Lakers and the Orlando Magic, only four are products of college basketball. The others were drafted out of high school, or from Europe. I also note that, in spite of the preponderance of African-Americans among the players, and quite a few among the coaches (an African-American was coach of last year's champions) both the coaches were white. (Both had African-Americans among their assistants.) The Women's NBA schedule is here. They will continue to play during the summer.

Computing:
CNet has an article on identity theft, including a link to a web site that assesses the likelihood that your identity is at risk.

Christianity:
Weekend Fisher has some fresh insight into Matthew 24:13 (which says that those who endure to the end will be saved.)

Image source (public domain)