|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Intelligent Design or unthinking blasphemy? | |||||||||||||||||||
ReverendDG Member (Idle past 4111 days) Posts: 1119 From: Topeka,kansas Joined: |
Again, death is a flaw to you. It is your opinion. This is your personal feeling and has nothing to do with science.
again you are not even reading what i posted at all. I was saying that a designer who includes flaws that kill life, is a useless designer, and as an aswer is flawed, since by useing the mind they should have, should not include the flaws, this is based on human design and reasoning for a designer. as a lifeform that can design things we know we wouldn't make designs that cause faults like this, at least if we are using our brains properlywhere in this quote did i say anything about science? you are just trying to put words in my mouth. evolution as an answer works far better to answer this, evolution theory expects this. until ID can answer this problem then i will consider it BS do not need others to give me my view. As I said, ID to further ones belief in God is faith. That is clear. But I do not see anything wrong with pursuing the simple question of wether or not the complexity of life systems indicates intellignence.
well woop-dee-doo,did i say that ID is used to reinforce faith in god? are you going to answer my questions? how could id be shown, have you read what ID says, how can you handwave away the main gist of ID?which happens to be "evolution is wrong, only ID is the answer" Again this is your assertion. Show me evidence that is not opinion.
do you not bother to read anything i post? it seems to me you need to go read about ID and evolution both, you shouldn't try to defend something you don't bother to read about. ToE says that biological structures will be co-opted for other uses by NS and adapted as well, like the appendix has been, the spine also shows this via the fact that our spine is better suited for 4 legs than 2This is your view. Your belief based on what you think should be. Edited by ReverendDG, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
2ice_baked_taters Member (Idle past 5851 days) Posts: 566 From: Boulder Junction WI. Joined: |
BS, this is pure BS. if something is flawed to the point of it killing the lifeform or causing pain for no reason other than it doesn't work, its a flawed design. how is this perfection by any reasoning? It is your belief there is no reason. That is your opinion.We learn nothing when stagnant. Pleasure is nothing without pain. You never know how good or valuable something truly is until you lose it. We see things in different ways when experiencing what you interpret as "flaws". We learn.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 412 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
2ice_baked_taters writes: It is only blasphemy if you assume the design is flawed. It's not an assumption. It's a conclusion. Do you know the difference?
One persons flaw is anothers perfection. That's just silly. In whose opinion is bad vision or bad joints "perfection"?
Now design, essentially, is when we replace the actual trial and error process with an abstract version of same. Suggesting God did this means He can err. Explain this more clearly. As I stated quite plainly, that quote is from the OP. It isn't my job to explain the OP to you. I quoted it to show that God is the topic.
This is not just another venue for pseudo-philosophical blatherings. Please discuss the topic. In case you hadn't looked at the title it is characterised by your above statement. The "unthinking" part?I was giving you an oppurtunity to do some thinking and perhaps redeem yourself. Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|||||||||||||||||||
ReverendDG Member (Idle past 4111 days) Posts: 1119 From: Topeka,kansas Joined: |
philosophical junk, sorry but what is the point to all of this?
you make no sense, this is from the standpoint of engineering, which is based on logic and how things function in relation to others what the hell does design from the point of ID have to do with anything you said? where is your evidence of design, or evidence of a designer or anything having to do with ID you are just evading and changing the topic, this is a science fora please stick to bloody topic for once
|
|||||||||||||||||||
2ice_baked_taters Member (Idle past 5851 days) Posts: 566 From: Boulder Junction WI. Joined: |
again you are not even reading what i posted at all. I was saying that a designer who includes flaws that kill life, is a useless designer, and as an aswer is flawed, since by useing the mind they should have, should not include the flaws, this is based on human design and reasoning for a designer. as a lifeform that can design things we know we wouldn't make designs that cause faults like this, at least if we are using our brains properly This is your assertion. A position of belief that death is a flaw. You have no basis for this assertion other than your opinion. In a practicle sense life on this planet would be quite difficult if nothing died. In a philosophical/spiritual sense we would not understand the value of life.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
ReverendDG Member (Idle past 4111 days) Posts: 1119 From: Topeka,kansas Joined: |
This is your assertion. A position of belief that death is a flaw. You have no basis for this assertion other than your opinion. In a practicle sense life on this planet would be quite difficult if nothing died. In a philosophical/spiritual sense we would not understand the value of life
more philosophical junk, i don't care about what you think death is. tell me how something is useful to a lifeform if its dead, or has bent legs that can kill it. i don't consider something designed because a designer, say a person could design it another way and not have this problem than can kill somethingdeath is a flaw, despite your philosophical handwaving, how is death useful if the thing gains nothing from this
|
|||||||||||||||||||
2ice_baked_taters Member (Idle past 5851 days) Posts: 566 From: Boulder Junction WI. Joined: |
It's not an assumption. It's a conclusion. Do you know the difference? Yeah, you have an opinion, so do I
That's just silly. In whose opinion is bad vision or bad joints "perfection"? We learn when dealing with our "imperfections" All lifes tough lessons teach us things.Apparently the tough part is pointless to you. It is not to me. The "unthinking" part? I was giving you an oppurtunity to do some thinking and perhaps redeem yourself. As I was, to hold yourself acountable to your own definitions. I have pointed out to you that you have an opinion. I recognise it. You are entitled to it. I happen not to share the philosophy.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 412 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
2ice_baked_taters writes: It's not an assumption. It's a conclusion. Do you know the difference? Yeah, you have an opinion, so do I We've heard that broken record. If all you can say is "That's just your opinion" over and over and over again, you apparently don't know the difference between an assumption and a conclusion.
We learn when dealing with our "imperfections" All lifes tough lessons teach us things. The fact that we learn to cope with our imperfections doesn't in any way stop them from being imperfections. If you are suggesting that our imperfections were "designed in" for our edification, then you are the one who is making unwarranted assumptions about the designer's intentions.
... to hold yourself acountable to your own definitions. You have to learn to read more carefully. I haven't given any definitions. Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|||||||||||||||||||
2ice_baked_taters Member (Idle past 5851 days) Posts: 566 From: Boulder Junction WI. Joined: |
We've heard that broken record. If all you can say is "That's just your opinion" over and over and over again, you apparently don't know the difference between an assumption and a conclusion. Your conclusion is your opinion based on assumption. Back it up.Back it up with evidence that is not anothers opinion. The fact that we learn to cope with our imperfections doesn't in any way stop them from being imperfections. If you are suggesting that our imperfections were "designed in" for our edification, then you are the one who is making unwarranted assumptions about the designer's intentions. I am no less entitled to my opinion than you are yours. I determine for myself in this venue what is warranted. As do you. If you choose not to recognise my right that is your choice. It does not affect me.I have chosen. You have to learn to read more carefully. I haven't given any definitions. This is not just another venue for pseudo-philosophical blatherings. Please discuss the topic. In case you hadn't looked at the title it is characterised by your above statement. You defined the topic as not being just another avenue for pseudo-philosophical blatherings. I pointed out that the topic was none other.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 412 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
2ice_baked_taters writes: I pointed out that the topic was none other. What you have pointed out is that you have no clue what the topic is. Unless your response contains some reference to blasphemy, I will waste no more time on you. Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|||||||||||||||||||
xXGEARXx Member (Idle past 5121 days) Posts: 41 Joined: |
Ok...
What makes human design so crappy? To be alive and able to function isn't gift enough? I mean, what are we supposed to be? Isn't that completely and TOTALLY opinion driven at best? Aren't there any nice things about our design? If it is not a design than what is life? What do you call it?
|
|||||||||||||||||||
xXGEARXx Member (Idle past 5121 days) Posts: 41 Joined: |
Ring0 writes: Because the "design" is so poor. As per the topic, blaming the "design" on God makes Him look like an idiot. Claiming that He created a "perfect" design that somehow made itself imperfect also makes Him look like an incompetent fool. Why is it poor? Who said it was perfect? I recall reading genesis and God said something like--it was very good.. I mean, life is very good, right? Or would you rather have been a pile of horse dung?
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Archer Opteryx Member (Idle past 3598 days) Posts: 1811 From: East Asia Joined: |
To be alive and able to function isn't gift enough? You're changing the subject, you know. You're not arguing for intelligent design now, but for gratitude. Different thing. If intelligent design were so obviously true, we would expect designs we see in nature to be intelligent. Not perfect, necessarily, but certainly not illogical. We would not expect to encounter a variety of designs we, even with our limited human intelligence, can easily improve. You have a creature that lives its entire life at sea. It is born at sea, it mates at sea, it cannot survive unless submerged in seawater. Its main food source is giant squid two miles down. No intelligent person would design that creature so that it has to come up for air. Why? A child knows better. We now know this same creature regularly gets the bends in the process of coming up to breathe. What logical purpose is served in such a 'design'? This is not the kind of thing you expect to see if an intelligent being out there is designing animals the way you or I might design a piece of furniture. But it is exactly the kind of thing you expect to see when you are looking at an unconscious, opportunistic process. It's the kind of thing you expect if an originally terrestrial animal found a survival advantage in the ability to move farther and farther out to sea, and evolved into an ocean-going creature. Archer All species are transitional.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 412 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
xXGEARXx writes: Why is it poor? Two obvious possibilities:
Who said it was perfect? Nobody. There's a whole spectrum between "perfect" and "crappy", you know. If you were hiring somebody to design complex machinery, wouldn't you look for competence, at a bare minimum? But "The Designer" is supposedly capable of "designing" everything from quarks to galaxies, so wouldn't you expect better than the bare minimum from such an entity? Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|||||||||||||||||||
2ice_baked_taters Member (Idle past 5851 days) Posts: 566 From: Boulder Junction WI. Joined: |
The answer is simple. No! Who has taken the time to look into the question?Has there been a study? Seems rather odd to simply dismiss the idea.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024