Our goals are similar but not identical.
I am indifferent about the precise definition of design. There is
probably more than one reasonable definition. If a definition
excludes naturalistic evolution, that's OK. If it allows evolution,
that's OK also. The only requirement that I can see is that the
definition be clear. But a definition is only a definition; it is
not a statement about what's real.
My interest is in an "intelligent designer" that is meaningful to
proponents of "intelligent design." I think that the minimum level
of designer that they will accept is a human being. An intelligent
ape that can create a tool of a twig is not intelligent enough; they
want detect beings, e.g., gods, that are plainly superior to apes.
The ID proponents suggest that the methods used to search for
extraterrestrial intelligence (SETI) can also be used to search for
other intelligent beings such as the Christian God. This raises the
question of how we would recognize the signs of an ET if we visited
another planet. Or, equivalently, how would an ET expedition to
earth recognize that man was intelligent?
If men and ETs met, this would be relatively easy to resolve. It
might take a few years, it might take a few wars, but men and ETs
would learn to talk to one another.
The more interesting question is how intelligent beings can be
recognized from their relics. How does one infer the existence of man
from a watch lost on the moors? Or how does one infer the existence
of ETs from signals received from other stars?
The approach of the SETI Institute is not too helpful
(http://www.seti-inst.edu/). They are only looking for "narrow-band
signals." Narrow-band signals are uncommon in nature; they are, on
the other hand, characteristic of some of man's inventions such as the
carrier portion of a broadcast signal. If they found a narrow-band
signal, they would look for some kind of modulation of the signal.
But, details get vague at this point.
Suppose a plague killed off all the human beings on this planet.
And suppose that ten thousand years from now, an ET expedition came
to the earth. How would they recognize that the earth had been
populated by intelligent beings?
I can suggest only two clues:
1) They would look for differences in materials found at sites that
they suspected were populated by men and sites that seemed "natural."
For example, William Paley's watch was made of steel. The moors
would only have traces of iron ore.
2) They would look for objects that are similar to objects that the
ETs invented and manufacture for themselves. Similar products imply
similar levels of intelligence.
It is possible to be fooled. If we traveled to another planet, we
might decide that the planet had been inhabited by beings similar to
us when, in fact, we were looking at structures constructed by ape-like
creatures controlled by instinct.
On the other hand, we might never recognize the relics of creatures
who were technically much more advanced than ourselves. The people of
the middle ages would not recognize that seeds had been genetically
modified if they somehow found samples of them.
Ivar
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Nov 09 2000 - 01:32:32 EST