Relationship between Mysticism and Intelligence

If human beings are intelligent, then ‘intelligence’ is not a mystical (or religious) concept.  For this reason alone, there can be no basis for the assertion or ridicule that intelligent' origin of life is "mystical" "non-scientific" or "superstitious".

The implication is that physical manifestations of intelligence, if they are above or beyond our capability to understand, somehow in virtue of our ignorance alone, become ‘mystical’ superstitious or religious (in the derogatory sense). 

Far from being a ‘scientific’ position, this is one of hubris or ignorance; a stubborn denial that we are the best and brightest of all sentient beings in the universe!  We automatically leap and say, “if something is smarter than us -- or operates at a level beyond our understanding -- it must be G-d!”  As if millions upon millions of degrees or levels may not exist between us and whatever might be deemed a ‘supreme intelligence’.  Or, maybe ‘supreme intelligence’ is simply the whole? (see also: anthro-po-aliens).

Obviously to an ant, we are inconceivable beings, not just because of our size, but because what we do is motivated by such sophisticated and subtle motives.  Even to an elephant, the creation of a microprocessor, or even artifacts less technical in nature such as a crayon, would seem ‘mysterious’.  It is all a matter of perspective. 

That those aligned with materials science as a belief system --more than a stance for the sake of inquiry-- cannot see this obvious irony or double standard is perplexing.  But, it is not for lack of intelligence obviously – these are very smart and accomplished people -- rather it is bias and the allegiance to an idea beyond its intellectual merits; an allegiance that distorts all other facts beyond recognition.

These persons are aligned to the idea that our world is dualistic, that either one believes in the purposeless world of physical cause and effect (which accidentally created stars, planets, planetary orbits, simple life, complex life, human life) or one must be dogmatically religious, and believe in the literal interpretation of religious books (like koran, bible, torah, etc.).  This is an absurd position to take. Non-surprisingly, this rigid 'with us or against us' attitude leads to the very ignorance, prejudice and perpetuation of ignorance that once oppressed the sciences.  Now the sciences repress themselves, and those indoctrinated by their short-sighted and irrational beliefs.  

This obsession with central dogma is highly reminiscent of what motivated Church accusations of “heresy” – crimes worth of the excommunication (or worse) of all those who did not fall in line with the acceptable institutional narrative.

---%---