Exactly 'HOW' intelligent must a Designer be ?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Philip:
It appears you can not perceive redemptive observations in nature. Understandable: we're all apt to be empirically blind in this matter.

​

But its foolish to deny your own let alone anyone else's redemptive excellencies using even empirical reasoning.

​

Redemptive excellencies will always be dissonant to our supposed naturalistic grand scheme(s) and will always testify against those who exploit a purely naturalistic scheme.

​

Whether you cite such redemptive events as Christ or directly oppose such events as observable (anti-Christ and/or anti-scientific) will never refute those events.

​

Give it up, Shraf, please. Count your empirical blessings; see the silver lining on every observable cosmic event, despite the naturalistic tendency to deny those observed excellencies. Reasonably deduct that it was all designed by a Jesus-Christ-like ID.

​

Why not steal a little faith in that redemptive science; get caught up in it; sing or cry a little prayer to it; love it; let it love you back, as it always has.

---

Fourth time I have asked:How do we tell an Intelligently-Designed system from a natural one that we1) Don't understand yet, or2) Don't have the capacity to understand?(Helpful Note: It's perfectly fine to say that you believe because you want to believe, and that there is no evidence. I have no opinion on religious beliefs of others. However, as long as you say that there is scientific evidence of ID, I will continue to ask the question. As long as you avoid giving some kind of answer, I will consider you to be avoiding the question.)------------------
"We will still have perfect freedom to hold contrary views of our own, but to simply
close our minds to the knowledge painstakingly accumulated by hundreds of thousands
of scientists over long centuries is to deliberately decide to be ignorant and narrow-
minded."-Steve Allen, from "Dumbth"

quote:

---

Originally posted by Philip:
The first 9 appear relatively more excellent in their harmonies, symmetries, and proportions; albeit some, like the fungus are destructive (cursing) as well.

---

Athlete's foot fungus is not destructive from the fungus' point of view, and probably not destructive from the viewpoint of any infectious organisms which are introduced secondarily, as well.------------------
"We will still have perfect freedom to hold contrary views of our own, but to simply
close our minds to the knowledge painstakingly accumulated by hundreds of thousands
of scientists over long centuries is to deliberately decide to be ignorant and narrow-
minded."-Steve Allen, from "Dumbth"

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Philip:
[B]SHRAF: How do we tell an Intelligently-Designed system from a natural one that we
1) Don't understand yet, or
2) Don't have the capacity to understand?PHIL: Extremely loaded question ...
Discerning an IDS vs. and naturally occurring one seems a matter of metaphysics (vs. some empirical answer I can never give). For I don't think anything, despite its evolution, is SANS ID.

quote:

---

Well, then, Theistic Evolution it is!

​

quote:

---

David Bowie on public radio stated: "I don't think we (humans) ever evolved", when questioned about the evolution of his music. The same, I think, holds true with so called natural evolution vs. ID. The thinking process of Philip is different than Shraf, both ways of thinking are stubbornly scientific by each being.

---

​

1)Who cares what a rock star thinks about Biology.

​

2)Our ways of thinking are not the same. I am willing to look at evidence and change my mind. You hold a pre-conceived notion of an IDer, and fit all the evidence into this notion.

​

Different.

​

quote:

---

Shraf embraces the empirical (natural) at the expense of the spiritual; Phil embraces the spiritual as (more real scientifically) at the expense of the empirical.

---

​

Gee, show me a single generally-accepted definition of science which includes "spiritual" as evidence and I will stop rolling my eyes.

​

quote:

---

Now, I, Phil, respect Shraf's empirical science only insofar as it enables persons/humans to negotiate and control the environment appropriately for all.

---

​

I am interested in understanding nature, first and foremost. Through understanding comes the ability to manipulate the environment.

​

Like I have said, we didn't eliminate smallpox by spiritual means. We studied it with emperical methods until we figured out how to eradicate it.

​

We didn't pray it away.

​

quote:

---

Like Bowie (despite his oft homosexual appearance), I think that nothing really evolved.

---

​

OK, but you're wrong.

​

quote:

---

I know you'll say I avoided your question (again). I'll answer that I'm only convinced (based on my perception of all the data including my nonempirical faith/biases) that:

​

I don't think anything is really an empirical naturally occurring event alone, but that all systems are under the power of ID and merely APPEAR to be randomizing unintelligibly.

---

​

OK, then your answer is that there is no way to tell the difference between an ID system and a natural one we don't understand or don't have the capacity to understand.

​

That is my point exactly.

​

Yippy skippy, you finally got it!

​

[QUOTE]Now ID is too apparent (to me) in:
Mysterious light, mysterious in that we don't really understand it!
Mysterious excellencies
Mysterious cosmic excellencies with the universal expanse
The extremely complicated earth with its water and billions of organic excellencies ...
Etc., etc., etc.
Time fails me.[/B]

---

That's nice, but if'n it ain't apparent to other people, then all you have is belief. Which is fine, of course, but not compelling to me in the least, and not useful to understanding how the universe works.------------------
"We will still have perfect freedom to hold contrary views of our own, but to simply
close our minds to the knowledge painstakingly accumulated by hundreds of thousands
of scientists over long centuries is to deliberately decide to be ignorant and narrow-
minded."-Steve Allen, from "Dumbth"