ID


as you know, dear reader, I don't do politics, religion, celebrity, to name but a few popular topics here (mainly because vicus and KAZ do them so much better and I've never been good at competition) and have recently managed to avoid all reference to the current crunchiness of the world

(this isn't a serious blog, as you might have guessed - I do have views [which I like, as you know] and opinions [which you may not], and there are other things that concern and affect me a lot of the time)

I mean - if I was that bothered, I'd either be a politician or eco-warrior, a priest or high-priestess or I'd be wallowing in fame, fortune and the incessant annoyance of the paparazzi that follows it myself

wouldn't I?

but yesterday I read something I feel I ought to share with you - just in case you missed it!

those good people in places in the world where ID is forwarded in educational institutions and other places of learning and sharing, as a valid theory of why we are all in existence and doing things like blogging as a more creative alternative to keeping a diary, or instead of the old-fashioned pen-pals schemes of our youth, or to communicate with the other people full of wonder and/or also, perhaps, to fill in the gaps in our days (well, why do you do it?), have come up with an extension on their beliefs:

the fact that we have minds proves the proposed theory of ID

of course, I read this article in my favourite weekly read, New Scientist for those as yet unfamiliar with the passing of my days, so perhaps the author was biased against the proposals before s/he contemplated them further. . .

. . .but contemplate them s/he did

interestingly the conclusion of the article was that perhaps we should not allocate meaning (a very human desire, you'll agree) to something that we don't quite yet understand

it made me think of Stonehenge, actually
.

we don't know why it was assembled - but we do know what it could have been made and used for (as we can guess at what our ancestors might have been thinking, in those ancient minds of theirs), and - and this my the point, I think - we "modern humans" know things now that they "not so modern humans" (altho they might have been at the time) might have been struggling to understand. . .
.
and that's the point of human existence, really, isn't it - it's what makes us human: the fact that we try and understand the world around us, and even those things that are out of this world - right back to the Big Bang. . .
.
so, I kinda get the ID people - they are just struggling (altho I know they wouldn't say it was a struggle) to put meaning onto things that we don't yet understand. . .
.
. . .but that is - I believe - their biggest mistake
.
and that's the point I'm trying incredibly lazily to make (the same one as the conclusion of the NS article) I guess:
.
sometimes we might just have to accept that we don't know/understand everything

I do have to add that I'm personally quite happy for individual people to believe what they believe, I have no problem with that whatsoever. . . (it's when they want to impose their beliefs on others, as "fact", that I get a little tetchy)
.
. . .and I do know how uncomfortable it feels to be in a place of not understanding. . . (and how horrid that feels, if one cannot "let go")
.
and there is so much that I do not understand
.
so much

8 comments:

ziggi said...

ID - I am (almost) ashamed to say I had no idea what you were talking about! I had to google it and eventually came up with Intelligent Design - I'm no wiser except that Aristotle had a lot to say on the subject.

And Stonehenge? It's a bunch of rocks in a circle and why on earth people think that's so clever I have no idea. Most 5 year olds can put rocks in a circle - they're big rocks I grant you, but that just requires more men not more intelligence.

I'm packing - it's not a job that's going well! Forgive me! I need a 5 year old to help me obviously!

KAZ said...

"sometimes we might just have to accept that we don't know/understand everything".
I can handle that idea.
Many phenomena are explained in learned textbooks according to a paper written by a 'scientist'.
It's often quite wrong but it gets passed on and on through the generations.
Mind you - lots of that crap earned me a living.
Enjoyed your post view.

Mel said...

Okay....I'm goin' to the Clue-less Corner!

Though I don't know what "ID" is, unless you're talking the 'ego, id, super-ego' stuff--which I DO know.....which you're not talking about.....which is WHY I'm over in the corner!

Which, I must add....is a nice corner with a bbq AND a jacuzzi, thanks to Shot!

BTW--I'm quite at peace with NOT knowing or understanding all things.
I rather like being off the hook TO know and understand all things.

:-)

Rimshot said...

So then you haven't visited my blog today?

(serendipity or irony?)

Rimshot said...

http://www.intelligentdesign.org/whatisid.php

Dave said...

Sorry to say good morning before you've got around to writing today's post. I may not be able to get back later though.

I, like the view said...

oh, please don't be sorry - I ought not to have written that yesterday! I'm very lucky for your daily visits, whatever time they are

katherine. said...

think about all of what we didn't know five hundred years ago....

there will be a great deal more we will know five years from now...

but I do like knowing...