GAGers who believe in evolution....what do you think of your very own brain?

Do you think that your very own brain needs an intelligent designer?If not,do you trust your very own brain if it is something that is as a result of evolution?

Updates:
Wow,I have made some unexpected discovery by asking this question! Especially how some users can answer so differently after I have used a different username here.Very sad indeed! :(

By the way,interpret this question in anyway you like.
Thank you for so many interesting answers!

0|0
2|11

Most Helpful Guy

  • This question kinda presupposes the need for it to be one rather than the other when this really isn't neccessary. I don't believe any of us were made perfect as none of us are (if we're going to bring the intelligent design argument into this than we might as well integrate a religious perspective), in christianity the very foundation of the belief is that no one of us has been made perfect. There is intelligent design but not in the conventional way. Intelligent design was integrated within the laws of the universe in order to foster the development of intelligent beings.

    The anthophic principle argues that the very basis the design in the universe was created in such a way that it would eventually lead to complex beings with highly evolved brains. If the temperature of the primal fireball that resulted from the big bang some 15 to 20 twenty billion years ago which was the beginning of our universe, if it had been a trilliontth of a degree colder or hotter then the carbon molecule that is the foundation of all organic life could never have developed. The number of possible universes is trillions of trillions; only one of them could support human life. if the cosmic rays had bombarded the primordial slime at a slightly different angle or time or intensity, the hemoglobin molecule, necessary for all warm blooded animals could never have evolved. The chance of this molecule's evolving is something like one in a trillion trillion, kinda the equivilent of ordering a billion monkeys to type hamlet by the random tappings of a typewriter for decades, not very likely...

    Evolution can be argued to be a wonderful example of creation rather than an arguemnt against it. if we just look at the brain as nothing more than somewhere where particles clash to explain actions

    2|0
    0|0
    • Hey,you sound so familiar!Haha.Have you answered my question/s before? :)

    • Show All
    • @''Evolution can be argued to be a wonderful example of creation rather than an argument against it.''(applause)

    • you're welcome :), and I am Catholic

What Guys Said 10

  • Considering the fact that my brain is full of defects (neurological dysfunctions) I can definitely believe it is the result of evolution.

    1|4
    3|0
  • Having taken an 8-month university course on Animal Psychology, I can only shake my head in disgust and walk away. I know there's nothing I can say that will help you understand, because you don''t want to understand. You need to believe in God, because of the unevolved condition of your soul. I can't help that and neither can you. You'll just have to carry on being uneducated.

    0|0
    4|1
  • A more important question that begs to be asked is, why do the most simple minded people tend to think some powerful being had to design their brain as some miraculous creation, while the most intelligent people want to go out there and discover why and how their brain came about? I guess when you see simple minded people marketing their brain out to be some magnificent creation, then you must assume something more complex was in play to endow the brighter individuals with more processing power.

    1|1
    3|0
  • I think it's fascinating. And I trust it to the limits that I know it has. It makes no difference whether it's an evolved or created thing, it's still a brain that has wants and needs and instincts.

    What I've learned through experience is this:

    Just because something is to complicated for us to explain or understand, doesn't mean it was created by something supernatural.

    I learned this through researching crop circles. For years I believed "they are to big and to complex, to possibly be made by people, therefore there has to be something bigger at work"

    Then I met teams of artists who regularly make them, and even made a few myself, completely disproving my theory. And I accept that. Now I only care about evidence, regardless of my personal beliefs and biases.

    Evolution holds a lot more evidence than creation. Not saying we wherent created, but there is no evidence that we where designed in the course of a day. If we where created by god, it was probably through the process of evolution.

    0|0
    0|0
    • Haha,interesting!what are crop circles?

    • lol large designs and patterns stomped in the crop fields. Some people think aliens make them, but it's just people doing graffiti.

  • It's just like any other organ on a h ther animal. It evolved to reach this point.

    1|2
    1|0
  • No. I do trust my brain depending on the situation. There are situations where I don't trust my brain but it has nothing to do with evolution, more along the lines of having too many emotions clouding my better judgement.

    0|0
    0|0
  • my brain is more complicated for a designer :)

    0|0
    2|0
  • 0|0
    0|0
    • I'm all for new scientific discoveries but the link isn't strictly true, in one sense yes but it depends on how you interprett it. People shouldn't forget that science works on faith and theory (to science's credit but still). You can't scientifically prove using the scientific method that science itself is beyond a theory. We have to make assumptions and have faith that the material world can scientifically be interpretted and defined

    • Show All
    • on “faith” (which means trust and ‘belief’ that something is true), when a new theory is proposed, there is little to no evidence to support it however the reason that scientist chooses to pursue it is because they have “faith” that this theory is credible. Otherwise there would be no progress without trial and error, there is a starting point. hpefully that clears up confusion

    • Right, those assumptions are called hypothesis and they aren't just random guesses but educated/experienced proposals.

      I don't think we're going to get anywhere with debating on this though. I disagree that people conducting some form of the scientific method have "faith" in something being the case because that seems like wasted effort or just plain redundant in the whole process. This "faith" really just amounts to this hypothesis, so it doesn't make sense to say faith is involved at all.

  • Your caution around a brain belonging to a person that (is assumed) to not believe in intelligent design is an assumption about this topic based on the wrong set of circumstances. The theory of evolution and intelligent design are two separate things altogether. If you think about and consider one, you must understand where that particular line of thinking comes from and explains. Thinking about evolution in animals with the premeditation of intelligent design is mixing the two together, and clouding up the both of them.

    0|0
    0|0
  • My brain did not require an intelligent designer. It's a product of my evolved DNA.

    1|1
    2|0

What Girls Said 2

  • The brain is a result of evolution not an intelligent designer,

    illnesses of the brain like Alzheimer, downs syndrome and many mental illness and pre dispositions to addictions and character traits, are often hereditary, passed down through genes. There's nothing to suggest that the brain did not evolve like everything else,

    We don't understand much about the brain yet, but just because something is a mystery does not mean there isn't a scientific explanation. People have always used superstition and higher powers to explain what they don't understand,

    1|4
    3|0
  • Brains are a result of evolution

    0|0
    2|0
Loading...