|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,814 Year: 3,071/9,624 Month: 916/1,588 Week: 99/223 Day: 10/17 Hour: 6/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Intelligent (maybe), but far from perfect | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Jack Member Posts: 3514 From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch Joined: Member Rating: 8.7 |
(singing) "a post so gooo-o-o-o-d, they posted it twice!"
Sorry.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Parasomnium Member Posts: 2224 Joined: |
I'm the one who is sorry, Mr Jack.
Thanks for the hint.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mammuthus Member (Idle past 6475 days) Posts: 3085 From: Munich, Germany Joined: |
Hi Parasomnium,
I do get your point...however, in your description you are anthropomorphizing evolution a bit by suggesting "wishing" for the next modification. It is clear that one can "progress" from a simple structure to a more refined and sensitive structure this seems to be rare in evolution i.e. optimizing a function. For example, it is becoming clear that humans are gradually losing olfactory receptor genes and our eyesight is rather poor contrasted with other primates, birth is hindered as a consequence of bipedal locomotion. Should this be called poor design? A solution to a problem is more accurate as it does not imply planning and it also does not imply that it is even a good solution to the problem...just the best that is out there currently. As to the comment on computer programs and what it means..perhaps it means my email system has been kaputt all day .....and my western blot crapped out ...and my back hurts ...all these poor designs... Zealot is trying...but get a load of A Christian
quote: Neither group can dance the Batoozy..and Robin had to learn from Adam West aka the real Batman
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Parasomnium Member Posts: 2224 Joined: |
Mammuthus writes:
The wishing was done by the unfortunate flying furball after a rather hefty meeting with a treetrunk.
you are anthropomorphizing evolution a bit by suggesting "wishing" for the next modification. Mammuthus writes:
Not quite. Moving from a simple structure to a more refined and sensitive structure happens all the time in evolution. Your apprehension of the idea of 'progress' is justified; however equating this movement with optimization of function is unwarranted.
It is clear that one can "progress" from a simple structure to a more refined and sensitive structure this seems to be rare in evolution i.e. optimizing a function. Mammuthus writes:
No, I'd call it 'once-good-enough-design becoming obsolete or outdated'.
For example, it is becoming clear that humans are gradually losing olfactory receptor genes and our eyesight is rather poor contrasted with other primates, birth is hindered as a consequence of bipedal locomotion. Should this be called poor design? Mammuthus writes:
At least we can agree on that.
A solution to a problem is more accurate as it does not imply planning and it also does not imply that it is even a good solution to the problem...just the best that is out there currently. Mammuthus writes:
You have my sympathy...
As to the comment on computer programs and what it means..perhaps it means my email system has been kaputt all day .....and my western blot crapped out ...and my back hurts ...all these poor designs... Mammuthus writes:
Hey! Do you mind?
Zealot is trying...but get a load of A Christian Mammuthus writes:
Hah! Robin was saving the world three times over when Adam West was merely a naughty glint in the eyes of his mother. Robin had to learn from Adam West aka the real Batman Cheers.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
I am not advocating the position mind you... Yes, I realize that. I'm mostly just thinking aloud.
we can tell when something is designed by humans i.e. clovis artifacts, Mt. Rushmore etc... Right, because as humans ourselves we're exposed to the idea of humans making things. And that's how we find out if a thing had been designed, in the past - comparing it to things that are being designed right now. On the other hand, there's no aspect to a clovis point that you could use to infer the existence of humans if you didn't already know that humans exist. There's no magic design essence that is imparted to those things that are designed, so the answer to your question:
what would indicate it in a natural system. would be, in my opinion, "nothing at all." There's no part of an object that can tell you it was designed unless you're looking at a part specifically designed for the purpose of telling you it was designed. (The "maker's mark" idea.) Life is nothing like anything we've ever seen designed. Ergo it seems reasonable to me to assume that it was not designed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
joshua221  Inactive Member |
quote: The world was perfect in the ID standpoint, about 6000 years ago before the fall of man. You do not know what you are talking about. Man was also perfect, Adam, Eve. Well almost perfect, they did sin. FALL OF MAN STARTED this "imperfectness" that you observe today. You obviously aren't looking at things from a high level. You need to know where Creationists stand on certain things before making faulty and rather blatant insults towards them. ------------------"As by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth? The number of intermediate links between all living and extinct species must have been inconceivably great!" (emphasis added) -- Charles Darwin
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Jack Member Posts: 3514 From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch Joined: Member Rating: 8.7 |
So, ProphecyExclaimed, you are telling us that every lifeform was, in fact, designed twice. Once for the 'perfect' version and then again for the 'imperfect' version, yes? That life has been designed to be flawed? Correct?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brian Member (Idle past 4959 days) Posts: 4659 From: Scotland Joined: |
Hi, PE
The world was perfect in the ID standpoint, about 6000 years ago before the fall of man. You do not know what you are talking about. Your evidence that this was the case?
Man was also perfect, Adam, Eve. Well almost perfect, they did sin. So you agree then that mankind was not created perfect? 'Almost' perfect is not the same as perfect, why do you think God created an imperfect human and then was miffed because that human made a mistake? A quote from Gene Roddenberry sums the situation up perfectly: "We must question the story logic of having an all-knowing, all-powerful God, who creates faulty humans, and then blames them for his own mistakes." From: http://thewaronfaith.com/atheist_quotes.htm Brian.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dan Carroll Inactive Member |
quote: Then you agree that the human body, as it stands today, is not enough to suggest intelligent design?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Parasomnium Member Posts: 2224 Joined: |
prophecyexclaimed writes: You need to know where Creationists stand on certain things before making faulty and rather blatant insults towards them. In the text you quoted I could find no insults, let alone faulty ones. Would you care to point out where MattS has insulted creationists? And could you also specify the faults? Cheers.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peter Member (Idle past 1478 days) Posts: 2161 From: Cambridgeshire, UK. Joined: |
quote: Unfortunately not even this is always true. There are some formations in the oceans (esp. around Japan)which some marine archeologists claim to be sunken city remains while others say that they could be naturally formed. Both have reasonably credible arguments, and a detrminationis pretty much impossible. The remains are so ancient, and have been underwater, that anyhope of tool-marks is gone. One of my problems with evidence of design in bioogical systemsis knowing 'what' has been designed. I'm not designed (as such) I was born and grew -- so what is itin biological systems that is claimed to have been designed?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peter Member (Idle past 1478 days) Posts: 2161 From: Cambridgeshire, UK. Joined: |
I've swayed back and forth between thinking of 'intelligent
design' as tautological and not, for exactly the reason you have mentioned. As a verb, 'to design' REQUIRES a design intelligence. This is, I think, why IDists focus on trying to proove thatbiological systems were designed -- and therefore intelligently so. I think the use of the word 'design' for the end result of naturalprocesses is more for brevity -- otherwise we'd have to say something like 'structures developed via natural processes which have the appearance of design' all the time. PS: Robin is a quitter -- he left and became Nightwing (whichwas just a poor copy of the persona Batman took on in the bottled city of Kandor) and his replacement (Jason Todd) got beaten to death by the Joker -- how can Robinism be of any worth?!??
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dan Carroll Inactive Member |
The Robinists lost me when they covered up all those scandals involving the young boys in green speedos.
Me, I'm a strict Millerite, who awaits the Dark Knight's Return. We ordain women as Robins, you know.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peter Member (Idle past 1478 days) Posts: 2161 From: Cambridgeshire, UK. Joined: |
quote: Yeah, but one slip and ... street pizza
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pro Terra Inactive Member |
Dear MattS,
Now note that this is only a suggestion, but where would we be with out the ability to improve. AND a lot of diseases are because of our modern society. Pro Terra
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024