Sunday, Jun. 26, 2005
You Call That Intelligent?
By BRUCE HANDY, Glynis Sweeny
School boards around the country have been grappling with whether "intelligent design" should be taught in biology classes. I.D., a supposedly more scientific alternative to creationism, insists living organisms are too complex to have evolved semirandomly, a la Darwin, and therefore must have been put together in a more thoughtful, hands-on way by ... someone.
[You're telling me I just spent millions of years growing passable lungs and these stubby little legs--for NOTHING?!]
Faith, of course, is one thing and should be honored in its sphere. But from an empirical point of view, one flaw with I.D. is that when you look at people, there seems to be so much room for, well, BETTER design.
[I mean, wouldn't a REALLY intelligent designer have made everyone look like Brad Pitt or Angelina Jolie?]
[Or is that confusing intelligent design with hormonal design?]
[And what if the designer were more of a David Hasselhoff fan?]
Couldn't aging have been handled with more flair and dignity? For instance: What if old people, instead of getting wrinkly and decrepit, just sort of poetically faded away?
[Happy 80th birthday, Grandpa!!]
[Over here, kids.]
And then there's adolescence, which, let's face it, could also stand prettying up.
[Or put it this way: Would a company like Apple, which cares about design, market a cute-looking product that eventually gets acne and starts smelling bad?]
[Maybe. It's called planned obsolescence.]
A troubling implication from a philosophical point of view: unlike Darwinism, I.D. suggests a static universe in which earth's many species have no hope of betterment.
[Planet of the Apes--if only ...]
[I had hoped to develop an opposable claw and someday work in the helping professions, but, oh, well.]
Some people would say evolution is evidence of a divine kind of beauty and call it a day. But alas, I.D.'s advocates keep pressing the issue, and the conflict shows no sign of abating.
[My grandfather wasn't a monkey!]
[And my God isn't responsible for MALE-PATTERN BALDNESS!]