Does idealism square with intelligent design?

[Ed Konderla]

Does idealism support Darwinian Evolution or Intelligent design?

[AshvinP]

Does idealism support Darwinian Evolution or Intelligent design?

Both.

[Astra052]

I mean I guess you could make an argument for either but I wouldn't bet against Darwinian evolution.

[Lou Gold]

Does idealism support Darwinian Evolution or Intelligent design?

And you might add competition or cooperation prioritized Darwinian Evolution? I think Idealism leans toward and allows all of the above, which is both its strength and its weakness. Select a fiction, a model or a story to believe and reap the results.

[Simon Adams]

It’s the science that supports evolution theory, as it’s by far the best theory we have using the scientific process.

However the scientific process by definition can only invoke ‘physical’ causes. So whilst there are many aspects of it that are beyond question, by definition it includes many physicalist assumptions. One of these is the assumption that evolution is directionless, as there can be no telos within nature, or in the way nature was created, without going beyond the assumptions of the scientific process. The idea that evolution theory is a full description is a form of scientism.

Even within the bits that science can uncover, there are hints of the bigger picture, such as the pre-existing “fitness landscape”, where you can see that there is an underlying inevitably that things like the eye will always develop eventually.

10-15 years ago I used to debate with scientists on evolution, and they were 100% sure that epigenetic evolution was pseudoscience. Now it’s mainstream, and we know that what a creature experiences in it’s lifetime can be passed on to it’s offspring.

So science is always going to give you a partial picture, and there are areas it can just never even consider (which you see with the big bang as well), but one thing you can rule out is the intelligent design rubbish that you get from Young Earth Creationists, which is junk science, junk theology ... just unhelpful crap.

[Ed Konderla]

Does idealism support Darwinian Evolution or Intelligent design?

Both.

I personally support that "both" is the right answer. Darwinian evolution does an adequate job of describing the process of small changes within species over time. It does a lousy job at describing the development of new species. Paraphrasing a quote I heard once "Darwinian evolution in effect says a tornado could pass through a junk yard and leave a fully functional Boeing 747 in it's wake."

[AshvinP]

Does idealism support Darwinian Evolution or Intelligent design?

Both.

I personally support that "both" is the right answer. Darwinian evolution does an adequate job of describing the process of small changes within species over time. It does a lousy job at describing the development of new species. Paraphrasing a quote I heard once "Darwinian evolution in effect says a tornado could pass through a junk yard and leave a fully functional Boeing 747 in it's wake."

Under idealism, the whole question of "small changes" vs. species-level changes does not really make sense. Ideal processes can interact in any number of ways to form more complete ideal networks. That which selects for those ideal networks are also ideal processes (or beings-in-process so to speak). Anyway, it is sufficient for now to say all forms of evolutionary theory which do not only focus on 'outer forms' but also on inner life indicate there are conscious purposes involved.

[Lou Gold]

Does idealism support Darwinian Evolution or Intelligent design?

Both.

I personally support that "both" is the right answer. Darwinian evolution does an adequate job of describing the process of small changes within species over time. It does a lousy job at describing the development of new species. Paraphrasing a quote I heard once "Darwinian evolution in effect says a tornado could pass through a junk yard and leave a fully functional Boeing 747 in it's wake."

Punctuated equilibrium. Extinction events, rapid speciation and gradual incremental refinement. More than "both", "all of the above and more."

[Ed Konderla]

Agreed.

[Lou Gold]

Agreed.

I think our theories tend to rationalize past events. Quite predictably a Christian might see Intelligent Design and a Buddhist might see Interdependent Co-arising in the very same thing. Meanwhile, Idealism allows both and more without compelling one or the other.