<br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 12/7/05, <b class="gmail_sendername">gts</b> <<a href="mailto:gts_2000@yahoo.com">gts_2000@yahoo.com</a>> wrote:</span><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">This Kansas professor criticised ID and its proponents and plans to offer<br>a course titled "Special Topics in Religion: Intelligent Design,
<br>Creationism and other Religious Mythologies" putting ID where it rightly<br>belongs: in courses about religion.<br><br></blockquote></div><br>
Actually, I *hate* to burst your bubble :-; but ID could well belong in
courses on science related to whether or not we were (a) setup as an
evolutionary experiment (as I pointed out in various MBrain discussiosn
-- 'natural' evolution may be able to explore certain computational
development paths better than 'designed' computation can); (b) whether
the universe itself is based upon cellular automata -- recently
discussed by Kurzweil based on work by Fredkin & Wolfram in TSIN;
and/or (c) whether or not "we" are completely running in a simulation
(ala the Matrix et al) [after all an MBrain can most likely support
> 10^24 human brains].<br>
<br>
Now of course, a *GOOD* discussion of ID doesn't focus on how "complex"
our *perceived* universe happens to be (actually "my" universe since
none of you are really out there...). A *GOOD* discussion focuses
on what would be required to create "our" universe (after all, if
MBrain level capabilities can dismantle planets, assembling solar
systems as evolutionary starting points for 'natural' computations
isn't that much harder. So the "I" in "ID" may simply be
post-singularity civilizations performing experiments in accordance
with our perceived understanding of the 'natural' laws of
physics. Now if they have elevated it to the level that we are
running in a sim, then all bets are off with regard to our
understanding (and proving) anything (IMO).<br>
<br>
It is worth pointing out that the above ID scenarios are *not* going to
make people falling into the "creationist" frame of mind particularly
happy. Added to the discussion they do however turn ID vs.
Evolution into something which merits serious consideration.<br>
<br>
Robert<br>
<br>