Well then, enlighten me. How would you know that the hypothetical space ship was designed by some intelligence and not spat out by the sun?
Because it's a spaceship.
Circular argument. ie
You know that the hypothetical space ship was designed, because it's a spaceship.
How would you detect design?
With reference to the processes actually known to produce things.
For example, since whenever we know how spaceships (and other machinery) are produced, it turns out to involve design, we would infer design in a spaceship even if we hadn't seen it produced.
On the other hand, if we see (for example) a wombat, then since whenever we know how an organism is produced, it turns out to involve reproduction and variation without design, we would infer the same for the wombat even if we didn't see the mummy wombat giving birth to it.
And, in the case of rocks, I know how igneous, sedimentary, and metamorphic rocks are produced, and it doesn't involve design, so I should classify the rock itself as undesigned. Of course, it might have been shaped into an arrowhead or a statue or whatever, and I know that those things are designed, since whenever we are able to check, a flint arrowhead has a flint-knapper and a sculpture has a sculptor; so in that case I should identify the material as undesigned but the form as designed.
But what if (you might ask) I encounter a class of thing entirely outside of my experience? Well, in that case I should try to see if I could see one of them being produced.
Of this method in general, we may note that it involves possessing actual knowledge, that it is a straightforward application of the scientific method, and that it leads to conclusions that are true; and for these reasons it will never appeal to the ID crowd who claim to be in the business of "detecting design" --- a method that works can obviously has no allure for them. And yet it does allow me to identify a spaceship as designed while you are unable to think of any reason why it wasn't "spat out by the sun".
The entire basis for you argument seems to be that:
1) Intelligent design does in fact, exist.
2) You know that rocks are not designed because you have knowledge of how they are formed.
(Which I totally agree with...though i must state that this is just *one* way in detecting design.)
I'm however curious, if ever you were to come across an object that was built by an intelligent agent, using methods outside your knowledge base.
How would you infer a designer?
Edited by SavageD, : No reason given.
Edited by SavageD, : No reason given.
™ Version 4.2