If there was actual evidence that we were the product of intelligent design
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-06-2015, 03:18 PM
RE: If there was actual evidence that we were the product of intelligent design
(11-06-2015 10:14 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(11-06-2015 09:17 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Do you still actually have trouble grasping what is and isn't a fallacy? Like seriously? Or will you never stop being incredulous in responses as you ask questions then often don't even bother dealing with the responses.

There's a difference from a claim and a claim saying, this seems intuitive to ME or I can't understand how THAT can be a correct claim.

I think many of you operate with a seeming disconnect in which these basic inferences are drawn by your everyday person.

That theists and atheists are in some sense operating similarly.

If a theists is someone who infers that the Old Man of The Mountain was a product of intention, because he recognizes that objects like Mt. Rushmore are a product of intention, the atheists (or at least the materialist) is someone who infers that Mt. Rushmore was a product of unintentional forces, because he recognigizes the Old Man on the Mountain is a product of unintentional forces.

Do you think different rules should apply when assuming unintentional forces vs intentional forces? Do you believe one position should be held as a default while the other should not?

You are mischaracterizing the determination of design there. Facepalm

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-06-2015, 03:20 PM
RE: If there was actual evidence that we were the product of intelligent design
(11-06-2015 11:30 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(11-06-2015 11:21 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  You can't infer anything is the result of a mechanism you can't prove is real.

You're still not being clear. Are you claiming inferring intentionality is inferring a mechanism? If so is claiming that something was unintentional inferring a mechanism as well?

Sure, and the mechanism inferred is natural selection.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-06-2015, 03:24 PM
RE: If there was actual evidence that we were the product of intelligent design
(11-06-2015 12:40 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(11-06-2015 12:23 PM)unfogged Wrote:  I would agree that the argument for ID was reasonable in earlier ages. As we have looked into nature and found more and more explanations for how things work and how they developed the explanation became less reasonable. At some point it should have become apparent that, when faced with something that is unexplained, the quick leap to "must be a product of intelligence" is no longer the best option. The foundations that once seemed solid have crumbled so holding on to the beliefs now is unsupportable.

I'm curious what your goal is with these arguments is though. Many people here were theists and I would guess that most of us already understand how theists can accept these arguments. I don't think you're pointing out anything new.

So in an earlier age the inference of design of a created order was entirely reasonable, and at some point in human history, it become unreasonable?

You stated this became so, after we learned how things worked, and developed. But what did this reveal? Did it flip the script, making non-design/ontological naturalism, materialism reasonable, while making teleological beliefs unreasonable? If so, I don't think this is what occurred at all. What occurred with the rise of Darwin and other factors, was that a non-teleological perspective was able to become a viable option, but not necessarily the only option, or even the only reasonable one. It didn't make a teleological perspective untenable, it just created a viable contender to it.

No, it made better explanations available.
When known mechanisms can explain the observations, choosing unknown ones becomes unreasonable.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
11-06-2015, 03:24 PM
RE: If there was actual evidence that we were the product of intelligent design
(11-06-2015 03:16 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(11-06-2015 10:05 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Notice your steps are questions about the designer, rather than merely about design. It's the distinction between inferring a robbery, and who the robber is.

You seem to be suggesting that design cannot be inferred unless we know who designed the item? Yet we can infer a robbery without knowing who the robber is.

You seem to be suggesting that design cannot be inferred from the item itself?

Those are not equivalent and it is appalling that you think they are.

We know that burglars exist. We have no evidence of a creator.

We exist. Therefore "a robbery" occurred (i.e. we were created). Therefore "a robber" exists (i.e. we were created by someone - the possibility of some creative process is excluded from the get-go). Rolleyes It's a ridiculous analogy.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
11-06-2015, 03:50 PM
RE: If there was actual evidence that we were the product of intelligent design
(11-06-2015 10:05 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  You seem to be suggesting that design cannot be inferred from the item itself?

Crystals are examples of highly regular structures that occur without design input. Patterns in sand on the seashore - is it your *God* carefully making nice regular ripple patterns everywhere every morning before some *asshole* seagull goes and runs all over it leaving tracks and spoiling his nice painting?

There are plenty of even non-living things that look designed. Mountains are all pointy - ever thought about that? Does God just prefer pointy mountains? They don't *have* to be pointy, some have e.g. flat tops. God just randomly decided to make some of them flat? *Coincidentally* the same ones which have not-easily-eroded layers of rock on the top?

In the case of things that are designed meaning resides both in the object designed and the designer. If I see a stone with a sharp edge I may think nothing of it, but in the hands of one who understands its use, it's a weapon. But stones may acquire sharp edges without anyone being involved in the design *process*. So seeing a stone with a sharp edge doesn't imply homicidal humans nearby.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-06-2015, 03:58 PM
RE: If there was actual evidence that we were the product of intelligent design
(11-06-2015 02:09 PM)tomilay Wrote:  When you ask such questions, it comes across to me, like I should be following some sort of script. A party line. Something I associate with organized religion.

Given the questions you've asked and the way you've responded it comes across to me like you are following a script an have an intent, something that I associate with organized religion.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-06-2015, 04:28 PM
RE: If there was actual evidence that we were the product of intelligent design
(11-06-2015 03:58 PM)unfogged Wrote:  
(11-06-2015 02:09 PM)tomilay Wrote:  When you ask such questions, it comes across to me, like I should be following some sort of script. A party line. Something I associate with organized religion.

Given the questions you've asked and the way you've responded it comes across to me like you are following a script an have an intent, something that I associate with organized religion.
You have a wrong perception. I am just happily different.

We have to remember that what we observe is not nature herself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning ~ Werner Heisenberg
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-06-2015, 04:29 PM
If there was actual evidence that we were the product of intelligent design
(11-06-2015 12:03 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(11-06-2015 11:48 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  If I were anymore straightforward, I'd be beating you in the head with a science textbook.

You accuse me of refusing to understand people, while refusing to clarify your point. You deliberately refuse to answer fairly straightforward questions to avoid doing so. Is it because you don't understand the questions?

You're the one that introduced the term mechanism, without particularly clarify how it's being used here in relationship to intentionality.

When I look at electronic device I can infer than it was intentionally produced, a product of intelligence. I can draw these inferences without knowing the how (the mechanism) involved in the production of the device. Just like I can infer that I've been robbed without particularly knowing how the robber broke in, or was able to carry away my items, etc...

I've already given you an example of what I mean by a mechanism (my greenhouse gas example). Mechanism is a pretty straightforward term. If you say a designer explains design, you need to show the designer (your mechanism and I've pointed this out multiple times on this thread, I'm sorry you're too stupid to read it) in order to properly connect your evidence of design to it.

You can't infer design, without a designer you're attributing it to.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-06-2015, 04:47 PM
RE: If there was actual evidence that we were the product of intelligent design
(11-06-2015 02:31 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  There's a certain order to structure, not particularly found when nature just shoots out consistently symmetrical shapes.

Bullshit. Show me one not found in nature.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
11-06-2015, 05:01 PM
RE: If there was actual evidence that we were the product of intelligent design
(11-06-2015 04:47 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(11-06-2015 02:31 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  There's a certain order to structure, not particularly found when nature just shoots out consistently symmetrical shapes.

Bullshit. Show me one not found in nature.

Someone doesn't seem to understand what crystalline materials are I guess. Drinking Beverage

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: