Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What is an ID proponent's basis of comparison? (edited)
Phage0070
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 4 (502913)
03-14-2009 2:56 AM


What is an ID proponent's basis of comparison?
In general an ID supporter does not first prove the existence of a deity and then from that point progress to evidence of intelligent design of the universe. Instead they tend to point at a earthly phenomenon and proclaim that it could only have been created by an intelligent entity, and from that point conclude that their preconceived beliefs are supported. Bear with me as I spell out this logical argument:
Premises:
1) There are things in the world which are natural, and things which are designed.
2) Humans are capable of distinguishing with a high degree of accuracy between natural things and designed things.
Logic:
1) ID supporter declares an example thing which most consider to be naturally occurring to be designed.
Conclusion:
1) Everything that exists was designed.
Most discussions get hung up on disproving the "logic" portion of the debate, even ignoring the logical leap that the example cited is representative of the whole of reality (Inductive Fallacy). I would instead like to focus on the crucial fact that the proposed conclusion disproves the premise itself. *IF* the entirety of creation was designed then there are no natural occurring things with which to be distinguished from designed things. Therefore the declaration of an ID supporter that something was clearly designed inherently contradicts their proposed conclusion.
Hence my question: If you believe that everything was intelligently designed, what is your basis of comparison?
Edit: "Therefore the declaration of an ID supporter that something was clearly designed inherently contradicts their proposed conclusion."
I suppose I got a bit wordy here, what I was trying to say is this: By making this argument an ID supporter is assuming something in their argument that they ultimately conclude to be false, making the entire argument invalid.
The logic is sort of like this:
1) A and B exist, and can be distinguished.
2) B is distinguished in one case.
3) Therefore, B in all cases.
My point is not that one instance of B cannot be extended to the whole of creation. My point is fundamental to logical argument itself; if you disprove a premise of a logical argument then the argument collapses. In the above arguments the first premise, if true, makes it impossible to reach the conclusion through valid logic.
What I am interested in is how an ID supporter avoids this problem in their arguments.
Edited by Phage0070, : Clarity

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Admin, posted 03-14-2009 9:14 AM Phage0070 has replied

Admin
Director
Posts: 12998
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 2 of 4 (502929)
03-14-2009 9:14 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Phage0070
03-14-2009 2:56 AM


The last sentence of the next to last paragraph, either I don't understand you or it's not really an inherent contradiction. Wouldn't it be that the conclusion doesn't follow from premise or reasoning? What you earlier in the paragraph described as a logical leap?
If it's just that I don't get it then there may be others that also don't get it, so please just edit your post so that the contradiction is explained more clearly. Or if you agree it's not a contradiciton then edit your post in that way. In either case, please post a note to this thread when you're done and I'll take another look.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Phage0070, posted 03-14-2009 2:56 AM Phage0070 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Phage0070, posted 03-14-2009 11:28 AM Admin has not replied

Phage0070
Inactive Member


Message 3 of 4 (502937)
03-14-2009 11:28 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by Admin
03-14-2009 9:14 AM


I hope the edit makes it more clear.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Admin, posted 03-14-2009 9:14 AM Admin has not replied

Admin
Director
Posts: 12998
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 4 of 4 (502955)
03-14-2009 1:21 PM


Thread copied to the What is an ID proponent's basis of comparison? (edited) thread in the Intelligent Design forum, this copy of the thread has been closed.

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024