Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 52 (9179 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Happy Birthday: Theodoric
Post Volume: Total: 918,149 Year: 5,406/9,624 Month: 431/323 Week: 71/204 Day: 13/34 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is ID falsifiable by any kind of experiment?
evolujtion_noob
Junior Member (Idle past 638 days)
Posts: 5
From: Austin
Joined: 09-26-2022


(1)
Message 1 of 507 (898693)
09-27-2022 7:55 AM


Michael Behe claims that if Lenski's experiment on e-coli produced some novel function, that would disprove ID.
I don't see how it would. Why couldn't the ID proponent just claim that the designer guided the experiment psychically? On theoretical grounds, the ID proponent could claim, "this couldn't have happened with mutation and natural selection. There was an infusion of information from somewhere." How can we rule out the activity of a designer when there are no limits on how this designer operates? Any experiment can be tainted.
It seems to me for ID to be falsifiable, there was to be some type of mechanism/limits for how the designer operates.

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by AZPaul3, posted 09-28-2022 10:57 AM evolujtion_noob has not replied
 Message 4 by Taq, posted 09-28-2022 11:33 AM evolujtion_noob has not replied
 Message 5 by PaulK, posted 09-28-2022 3:34 PM evolujtion_noob has not replied
 Message 6 by ringo, posted 09-28-2022 3:37 PM evolujtion_noob has replied
 Message 9 by WookieeB, posted 10-07-2022 8:58 PM evolujtion_noob has replied
 Message 13 by MrIntelligentDesign, posted 10-09-2022 9:22 PM evolujtion_noob has not replied

  
evolujtion_noob
Junior Member (Idle past 638 days)
Posts: 5
From: Austin
Joined: 09-26-2022


(1)
Message 7 of 507 (898733)
09-28-2022 4:52 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by ringo
09-28-2022 3:37 PM


ringo writes:
If some super-entity can violate the laws of physics willy-nilly, then we can't know anything. If it can change the length of a day, we can't predict when tomorrow will come. If it can suspend the law of gravity, there's no sense in us building bridges.
Yes, that's my point. If "design" includes any type of mechanism how could it possibly be falsified. I'm puzzled by ID proponents like Behe and Meyer saying that if certain experiments produced certain results, ID would be falsified. They would be falsified if they specified or limited the possible actions of a designer. But if design includes actions of a supernatural kind (with who knows what motivations), how would it be possible to falsify that?
So it seems to me that ID is unfalsifiable, and unscientific.
They seem to have some implicit assumptions in how the designer would behave.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by ringo, posted 09-28-2022 3:37 PM ringo has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by PaulK, posted 09-28-2022 4:57 PM evolujtion_noob has not replied

  
evolujtion_noob
Junior Member (Idle past 638 days)
Posts: 5
From: Austin
Joined: 09-26-2022


Message 12 of 507 (899185)
10-09-2022 6:43 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by WookieeB
10-07-2022 8:58 PM


WookieeB writes:
First, where did Behe say this? Can you provide a quote or reference?
In this video at 38:24
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFut_C3DSB8&t=2336s
WookieeB writes:
Because ID wouldn't comment on such a manner of guidance. Instead, it would take a look at what has been observed and evaluate any changes via scientific and analytical methods, just as Behe has already done on reported changes in Lenski's experiment.
WookieeB writes:
Nonetheless, for ID there are limits as to how a designer would operate.
What are these limits and have they been stated? This is exactly what I'm looking for, because I haven't seen anyone giving any parameters/mechanism for how the designer operates. Until these parameters have been stated, I don't see how to rule out the interference of a designer in any experiment.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by WookieeB, posted 10-07-2022 8:58 PM WookieeB has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by WookieeB, posted 10-11-2022 3:48 AM evolujtion_noob has replied

  
evolujtion_noob
Junior Member (Idle past 638 days)
Posts: 5
From: Austin
Joined: 09-26-2022


Message 18 of 507 (899257)
10-11-2022 4:37 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by WookieeB
10-11-2022 3:48 AM


WookieeB writes:
ID doesn't have to define the parameters/mechanism for how a (not "the") designer operates. If there is no likely, undirected cause that can be demonstrated to produce the particular effect AND (not OR) it exhibits a purposeful arrangement of parts/settings (which in our uniform experience always leads back to a mind), then design can be inferred.
So if something is repeatable by experiment... and not directed by the experimenter... would you rule out a mind directing the experiment?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by WookieeB, posted 10-11-2022 3:48 AM WookieeB has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by WookieeB, posted 10-11-2022 9:59 PM evolujtion_noob has replied

  
evolujtion_noob
Junior Member (Idle past 638 days)
Posts: 5
From: Austin
Joined: 09-26-2022


Message 28 of 507 (899322)
10-11-2022 10:35 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by WookieeB
10-11-2022 9:59 PM


WookieeB writes:
Assuming there is not some detectable mind other than the experimenter's , umm... Yes.
Ok. That's interesting to me. So you don't take the results of the experiment itself as evidence of a mind.
So I think you posted this before, but for you there are 2 reasons for leaning towards ID. If either one were false, then you wouldn't be in favor of ID?
1. Known mechanisms don't explain the complexity of life.
2. There are no repeatable undirected experiments showing this complexity arise.
So if we could have repeatable experiments showing this complexity arise... even if we don't know the mechanism, you'd still rule out a designer... ie: you wouldn't resort to the reasoning... "the only known mechanism for this happening is intelligence" ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by WookieeB, posted 10-11-2022 9:59 PM WookieeB has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by WookieeB, posted 10-12-2022 12:26 AM evolujtion_noob has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024