Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What IS evidence of design? (CLOSING STATEMENTS ONLY)
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 76 of 377 (607911)
03-07-2011 6:39 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by Percy
03-07-2011 6:25 PM


Re: Judging Design by Inspection is Impossible
Why is it not possible to judge based on inspection?
For example, if you look at each of your examples in situ, in the surrounding context, I imagine that I could tell which were design and which were not.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Percy, posted 03-07-2011 6:25 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by Percy, posted 03-07-2011 8:43 PM jar has replied

Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 77 of 377 (607912)
03-07-2011 6:42 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by Briterican
03-07-2011 3:39 PM


As I am not the sharpest knife in the drawer, I wonder if any of you could explain to me how this is NOT related to symbiosis, OR, why Darwin would revise said quote were he alive today?
Symbiosis benefits both species. For example, flowers offer nectar as a benefice to bees. Bees, in return, transfer pollen from one flower to the next. Both benefit.
What you would need to find is a feature that encouraged or facilitated parasitism.
Having seen this argument come up sooooo many times, I question the very use of the word "designed" as an adjective. All the definitions are inadequate to answer this debate. It's like we need to split the word into two versions, one meaning "designed by an intelligent agent" and the other "ordered and structured".
Indeed. Waves create designs in rock. Clouds form designs all of the time (I always see dragons for some reason).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Briterican, posted 03-07-2011 3:39 PM Briterican has seen this message but not replied

ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 78 of 377 (607915)
03-07-2011 6:54 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by Percy
03-07-2011 6:25 PM


Re: Judging Design by Inspection is Impossible
What if I take a piece of driftwood and don't change it in any way except to put it on my coffee table? Did I "design" something by selecting a new location for it?

You can have brevity and clarify, or you can have accuracy and detail, but you can't easily have both. --Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Percy, posted 03-07-2011 6:25 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by jar, posted 03-07-2011 7:01 PM ringo has replied
 Message 83 by Percy, posted 03-07-2011 8:44 PM ringo has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 79 of 377 (607916)
03-07-2011 7:01 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by ringo
03-07-2011 6:54 PM


Re: Judging Design by Inspection is Impossible
ringo writes:
What if I take a piece of driftwood and don't change it in any way except to put it on my coffee table? Did I "design" something by selecting a new location for it?
Wouldn't that be very similar to Stonehenge?
When we find driftwood in an unusual place, particularly on a coffee table, is it not reasonable to assume that a human did move the wood?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by ringo, posted 03-07-2011 6:54 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by ringo, posted 03-07-2011 7:09 PM jar has not replied

ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 80 of 377 (607917)
03-07-2011 7:09 PM
Reply to: Message 79 by jar
03-07-2011 7:01 PM


Re: Judging Design by Inspection is Impossible
jar writes:
When we find driftwood in an unusual place, particularly on a coffee table, is it not reasonable to assume that a human did move the wood?
Yes, I think that's a resonable assumption. Things like toolmarks aren't the only signs of human intervention.

You can have brevity and clarify, or you can have accuracy and detail, but you can't easily have both. --Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by jar, posted 03-07-2011 7:01 PM jar has not replied

Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(1)
Message 81 of 377 (607919)
03-07-2011 7:25 PM


Design
We deal with "design" all the time in archaeology, particularly with things like stone and bone tools.
And there is no way to tell with some items whether they are natural or modified. Creeks and talus slopes can bash or grind items together, sometimes making a natural item appear deliberately modified.
And in fact, some natural items can become artifacts by their use. Good examples are door stops and paper weights. They serve a function, and can be classified as artifacts, but their use doesn't necessarily leave any evidence.
There have been thousands of studies in a variety of fields devoted to determining whether particular items are artifacts, and what their uses were. And there are still items where we just can't tell.
Creationists, on the other hand, are more in the "no study required, I know it when I see it" camp.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 82 of 377 (607922)
03-07-2011 8:43 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by jar
03-07-2011 6:39 PM


Re: Judging Design by Inspection is Impossible
jar writes:
For example, if you look at each of your examples in situ, in the surrounding context, I imagine that I could tell which were design and which were not.
You could probably do a pretty fair job of telling which were done by people and which were not.
Earlier I said that what is really being discussed is whether we can recognize things produced by people, but "design" hasn't really been defined. Dembski at least has a (claimed) mathematical definition.
--Percy
Edited by Percy, : Grammar.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by jar, posted 03-07-2011 6:39 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by jar, posted 03-07-2011 8:52 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied
 Message 85 by NoNukes, posted 03-07-2011 9:03 PM Percy has replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 83 of 377 (607923)
03-07-2011 8:44 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by ringo
03-07-2011 6:54 PM


Re: Judging Design by Inspection is Impossible
jar writes:
What if I take a piece of driftwood and don't change it in any way except to put it on my coffee table? Did I "design" something by selecting a new location for it?
Seems like a better question for Jar.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by ringo, posted 03-07-2011 6:54 PM ringo has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 84 of 377 (607924)
03-07-2011 8:52 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by Percy
03-07-2011 8:43 PM


Re: Judging Design by Inspection is Impossible
I agree that we have no definition of design and I am not sure that a definition of design is even possible. I think what we can see is evidence of outside influence and interference. The important thing I see is that where we can see such signs we can also point to the evidence that leads to a conclusion of influence and interference and they correspond to examples we can see today.
But in each case of determining design (meaning interference by a known external entity) we can lay out exactly what the evidence is and even possible methods of the influence and interference.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by Percy, posted 03-07-2011 8:43 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 85 of 377 (607925)
03-07-2011 9:03 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by Percy
03-07-2011 8:43 PM


Defining design.
Could you provide a pointer to Dembski's definition of design? I was of the impression that Dembski had merely proposed a mathematical basis for identifying design.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by Percy, posted 03-07-2011 8:43 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by PaulK, posted 03-08-2011 2:07 AM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied
 Message 87 by Percy, posted 03-08-2011 8:08 AM NoNukes has replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 86 of 377 (607946)
03-08-2011 2:07 AM
Reply to: Message 85 by NoNukes
03-07-2011 9:03 PM


Re: Defining design.
I think that it is better to say that Dembski defined design for the purposes of his argument/ i.e. the definition is not intended for general use, only to make explicit what it means within the structure of the argument.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by NoNukes, posted 03-07-2011 9:03 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 87 of 377 (607977)
03-08-2011 8:08 AM
Reply to: Message 85 by NoNukes
03-07-2011 9:03 PM


Re: Defining design.
See Dembski - Wikipedia.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by NoNukes, posted 03-07-2011 9:03 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by jar, posted 03-08-2011 8:57 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied
 Message 90 by NoNukes, posted 03-08-2011 9:09 AM Percy has replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 88 of 377 (607978)
03-08-2011 8:16 AM


Irony
I couldn't help reading more of the Dembski entry at Wikipedia and found this:
Dembski once took his family to a meeting conducted by Todd Bentley, a faith healer, in hopes of receiving a "miraculous healing" for his son, who is autistic. In an article for the Baptist Press he recalled disappointment with the nature of the meeting and with the prevention of his son and other attendees from joining those in wheelchairs who were selected to receive prayer. He then concluded, "Minimal time was given to healing, though plenty was devoted to assaulting our senses with blaring insipid music and even to Bentley promoting and selling his own products (books and CDs)." He wrote that he did not regret the trip and called it an "education," which showed "how easily religion can be abused, in this case to exploit our family."
--Percy

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 89 of 377 (607986)
03-08-2011 8:57 AM
Reply to: Message 87 by Percy
03-08-2011 8:08 AM


Re: Defining design.
Percy writes:
See Dembski - Wikipedia.
--Percy
The problem with that is that it doesn't tell us how to identify Specified Complexity or why Specified Complexity is evidence of design.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by Percy, posted 03-08-2011 8:08 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 90 of 377 (607990)
03-08-2011 9:09 AM
Reply to: Message 87 by Percy
03-08-2011 8:08 AM


Re: Defining design.
quote:
Dembski states that specified complexity is a reliable marker of design by an intelligent agent, a central tenet to intelligent design and which Dembski argues for in opposition to modern evolutionary theory.
This article just says that specified complexity indicates intelligent design. But what is design?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by Percy, posted 03-08-2011 8:08 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by Percy, posted 03-08-2011 9:53 AM NoNukes has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024