Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Intelligent Design - a fancy name for Superstition; & words for Dr. Frist

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Religion/Theology Donate to DU
 
NAO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-05 10:20 PM
Original message
Intelligent Design - a fancy name for Superstition; & words for Dr. Frist
Intelligent Design is just a fancy name for Primitive Superstition.

When primitive man saw the tress rustling, he ascribed it to the "wind gods". When he saw rain falling, he ascribed it to the "tears of the sky gods". Whenever a primitive man saw an event in the natural world, he attributed it to a personal being acting purposively. The superstitions mind sees natural events it does not understand, and then assumes that they are caused by a supernatural agent - i.e., the natural event is believed to have been caused by "intelligent design" by some unseen being.

****

This excerpt was chosen both because it makes the same point about Superstition, and because it contains some history of Medical Practice and how superstition has influenced that art. I thought Dr. Frist should know.

From Ingersoll's "The Ghosts"
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/robert_ingersoll/ghosts.html

For thousands of years it was believed that ghosts, good and bad, benevolent and malignant, weak and powerful, in some mysterious way, produced all phenomena; that disease and health, happiness and misery, fortune and misfortune, peace and war, life and death, success and failure, were but arrows from the quivers of these ghosts; that shadowy phantoms rewarded and punished mankind; that they were pleased and displeased by the actions of men; that they sent and withheld the snow, the light, and the rain; that they blessed the earth with harvests or cursed it with famine; that they fed or starved the children of men; that they crowned and uncrowned kings; that they took sides in war; that they controlled the winds; that they gave prosperous voyages, allowing the brave mariner to meet his wife and child inside the harbor bar, or sent the storms, strewing the sad shores with wrecks of ships and the bodies of men.

It has always been believed that these ghosts could in some way be appeased; that they could be flattered by sacrifices, by prayer, by fasting, by the building of temples and cathedrals, by the blood of men and beasts, by forms and ceremonies, by chants, by kneeling and prostrations, by flagellations and maiming, by renouncing the joys of home, by living alone in the wide desert, by the practice of celibacy, by inventing instruments of torture, by destroying men, women and children, by covering the earth with dungeons, by burning unbelievers, by putting chains upon the thoughts and manacles upon the limbs of men, by believing things without evidence and against evidence, by disbelieving and denying demonstration, by despising facts, by hating reason, by denouncing liberty, by maligning heretics, by slandering the dead, by subscribing to senseless and cruel creeds, by discouraging investigation, by worshiping a book, by the cultivation of credulity, by observing certain times and days, by counting beads, by gazing at crosses, by hiring others to repeat verses and prayers, by burning candles and ringing bells, by enslaving each other and putting out the eyes of the soul. All this has been done to appease and flatter these monsters of the air.

Let me call your attention to what we have received from the followers of the ghosts. Let me give you an outline of the sciences as taught by these philosophers of the clouds.

All diseases were produced, either as a punishment by the good ghosts, or out of pure malignity by the bad ones. There were, properly speaking, no diseases. The sick were possessed by ghosts. The science of medicine consisted in knowing how to persuade these ghosts to vacate the premises. For thousands of years the diseased were treated with incantations, with hideous noises, with drums and gongs. Everything was done to make the visit of the ghost as unpleasant as possible, and they generally succeeded in making things so disagreeable that if the ghost did not leave, the patient did. These ghosts were supposed to be of different rank, power and dignity. Now and then a man pretended to have won the favor of some powerful ghost, and that gave him power over the little ones. Such a man became an eminent physician.

It was found that certain kinds of smoke, such as that produced by burning the liver of a fish, the dried skin of a serpent, the eyes of a toad, or the tongue of an adder, were exceedingly offensive to the nostrils of an ordinary ghost. With this smoke, the sick room would be filled until the ghost vanished or the patient died.

It was also believed that certain words, -- the names of the most powerful ghosts, -- when properly pronounced, were very effective weapons. It was for a long time thought that Latin words were the best, -- Latin being a dead language, and known by the clergy. Others thought that two sticks laid across each other and held before the wicked ghost would cause it instantly to flee in dread away.

For thousands of years, the practice of medicine consisted in driving these evil spirits out of the bodies of men.

In some instances, bargains and compromises were made with the ghosts. One case is given where a multitude of devils traded a man for a herd of swine. In this transaction the devils were the losers, as the swine immediately drowned themselves in the sea. This idea of disease appears to have been almost universal, and is by no means yet extinct.

The contortions of the epileptic, the strange twitchings of those afflicted with chorea, the shakings of palsy, dreams, trances, and the numberless frightful phenomena produced by diseases of the nerves, were all seized upon as so many proofs that the bodies of men were filled with unclean and malignant ghosts.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DanCa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-05 10:28 PM
Response to Original message
1. Let's put this too bed right now ID is not bible study damnit
It's trojan horse anti choice politics wrapped around creationism to get thier twisted theocracy a foot in the door in the public education system. Now luckily I have more I have parents that taught me too temper my beliefs with reason and manners so as not to push anything on anyone. I know plenty of fundamentlist in all walks of life from every religion and non religion around.
So anyhow I thought I'd get my bud nipper and nip this in my bud that Intelligent Design is not bible study.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NAO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:13 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. ID is cruder form of superstition than bible study
To study the texts of revealed religion is an advanced form of superstition that developed in the context of early civilizations.

The attribution of personal agency to natural phenomena is pure primitive superstition in its crudest form. The whole ID moniker is a fancy high-falutin way of making the 'there is wind - that is the spirit of the wind god'; 'there is fire - the spirit of the fire god'; mentality seem more palatable and less like the gibberish of prehistoric man.

Now that ID is a transparent trojan-horse for the Radical Dominionist Conservative Christian Religious Reich Neo-Fascist Theocratic agenda goes pretty much without saying. I'm just saying that if you stop and look at ID, it's just a very flimsily disguised version of the superstition of the most primitive savages.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DanCa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:36 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. I think were both in the same neighborhood
I think essentially were on the same page, were just emphasing different aspects of this. Your emphasing the superstition part and am emphasing the political part. My biggest fear is that the repugs are going to use this as the first step to outlaw Dems from going to church.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PsychoDad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 05:55 AM
Response to Original message
4. ID is not superstition.
Edited on Mon Aug-22-05 05:56 AM by PsychoDad
Your post eloquently points out what superstition is. It is the belief that if I do A that B will follow irregardless that there may or may not be a logical correlation.

Such as wearing the same socks to each game, because the last time I wore them my team won.

On the other hand, if I look at the universe around us, and I conclude that there must be an unseen will in the beauty and order, that is an opinion.

If I assign a name and reason to the conclusion, then it becomes religion.

If I believe if I don't wear my game socks on super bowl sunday that the order of the universe will somehow be broken and my team will lose, that is superstition.

The first two of the above have no place in the Science classroom, as they cannot be tested to yield reproducible results. The third one, superstition, can be empirically tested with the scientific method.

Again ID cannot, it is an opinion.

And it was the testing of superstition that led to modern science.

And just as most here can see that the christian creationists are using ID to shoehorn "creation science" into the classroom, we can also see that calling ID a superstition is simply tossing an insult to the intelligence of those here and elsewhere who may feel that there is a purpose or will behind all of "this".

And that's a lot more than just christian creationists.

You have a right to the opinion to the contrary, and that is all it is... Unless, you can create a reproducible test to prove your hypothesis that there is no intelligent design.

Peace
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grumpy old fart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 09:30 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Neither "opinion" can be tested, and is therefore useless as Science......
Edited on Mon Aug-22-05 09:33 AM by grumpy old fart
"...Unless, you can create a reproducible test to prove your hypothesis that there is no intelligent design"

That is the basic problem with Creationism, in it's many disguises, of course. It leads no reliable laws or theories that can be tested and built upon. It's fine as Philosophy, but not as Science.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 07th 2024, 09:55 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Religion/Theology Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC