Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 59 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,929 Year: 4,186/9,624 Month: 1,057/974 Week: 16/368 Day: 16/11 Hour: 0/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Intelligent Design Creationism
Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 152 of 154 (200736)
04-20-2005 5:39 PM
Reply to: Message 150 by commike37
04-19-2005 11:59 PM


Re: Dembski's EF is a failure
quote:
Furthermore, specified complexity (meaning both specified and complex) is the criterion for design. If it fails this criterion it falls into chance.
Specified complexity is entirely a subjective term. It is not objective in any way. It is a quality that exists in Dembski's mind, and his mind only. His definition of both SPECIFIED and COMPLEX moves around willy-nilly on a case by case basis.
quote:
You could argue that we have insufficient information to make the calculations for the EF in a specific case, but that shouldn't generalize to say the EF is wrong in all scenarios. Insufficient information is simply not having enough information to use the EF (in situation X only), not a fatal flaw to the EF itself.
To apply the EF, according to Dembski himself, you have to know the entire causal history of what you are studying. For the bac flag, you would have to know exactly how it came about, including all precursors. Needless to say, it is impossible to apply the EF in the case of the bac flag.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by commike37, posted 04-19-2005 11:59 PM commike37 has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024