Tuesday, February 21, 2006

Intelligent Design versus Lord of the Rings

The ‘debate’ (and I use the term loosely) of whether intelligent design (I.D.) is a viable alternative to Darwinian evolution rages on in the media. This proposition frightens me, but also gives me hope. This idea of I.D. opens up the door to many wonderful possibilities. No more will academic curricula need to be grounded in reality. The fact that we can create any hypothesis and will it to be is a fantastical notion! Let’s explore.

If intelligent design should be taught as science, I say we entertain the idea of teaching J.R.R. Tolkien’s, The Lord of the Rings, as history. By following the intelligent design model of logic, you cannot disprove that the events in The Lord of the Rings actually happened any more than you cannot disprove the theory that Noah built an ark and scoured the globe, placing two of each specie of animal on his astronomically-large boat.

Fact: The Bible and The Lord of the Rings were both written by men; albeit Tolkien is a far more compelling wordsmith than John, Matthew and Mark (in my opinion). They both take care in crafting a world with deities, heroes and a struggle of good versus evil. After all, we cannot disprove the fact that there ever were wizards, trolls and Hobbits, can we? Jesus performed magic, so let’s not be so close-minded to the idea.

Literary scholars claim that Tolkien fashioned many of his own languages. This is an excellent theory, but what if he was only passing down knowledge that was, in fact, passed on to him? Tolkien himself could have been a wizard. You can’t disprove it. If I was a wizard, I don’t think you’d catch me doing wizardly things around mere mortals. Why do you think we can’t find Harry Potter’s wizarding school, Hogwarts? (Because they don’t want us to – for the same reason we can’t find the remains of Jesus or Noah’s boat, which would have had to have been larger than Michigan’s stadium in Ann Arbor. I don’t know who they are [possibly wizards], but they are definitely terrific at keeping secrets. The U.S. government could learn a thing or two from possible wizards.) There is a good chance that Jesus was a wizard as well. Of course this is all speculation, but that is what makes intelligent design so much fun – you don’t actually need any real facts to make it a real science. All it takes is for a certain amount of people to believe in it. Justification only requires an audience’s acceptance. Enough people accepted that there were weapons of mass destruction. In a democracy, you only need a majority. In the case of electing a U.S. president, you don’t even need that. You have got to love American logic!

This new historical perspective should be named “Tolkienology,” after its founder. Intelligent design is such a good model for creating sciences that it only makes sense. Christianity, Tolkienology; you get the idea. I say, if biologists are still looking for “the missing link” then Tolkienologists can still be looking for Hobbits. My hypothesis? Hobbits ARE “the missing link.” You can’t disprove it. Find the hobbits, find the missing link; score one for the Darwinians and Tolkienologists.