Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 62 (9024 total)
55 online now:
jar, LamarkNewAge, PaulK, Tanypteryx (4 members, 51 visitors)
Newest Member: Moe's URL Addresss
Post Volume: Total: 882,863 Year: 509/14,102 Month: 509/294 Week: 265/136 Day: 41/32 Hour: 2/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What is design? Can we not find evidence of design on earth or in the universe?
Huntard
Member (Idle past 1045 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 5 of 185 (485091)
10-05-2008 3:46 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by NOT JULIUS
10-03-2008 7:34 PM


Doubting Too writes:

For example, the position of the earth vis a vis the sun. Our planet is so well placed vis a vis the sun. A few feet away from the sun (compared to where we are now) , and we all freeze to death. A few feet near the sun and we all burn.

proof of high skill: exact placement--where we are now
purpose or goal:the purpose of the earth's exact location is for life to thrive.


First of all, a few feet closer or a few feet farther from the sun don't matter one bit.

But I think you have it turned around, life on earth fits the earth so perfectly because it evolved to adapt to the circumstances the earth has. Not because the earth was designed to bring forth exactly this kind of life.


I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by NOT JULIUS, posted 10-03-2008 7:34 PM NOT JULIUS has not yet responded

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 1045 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 18 of 185 (485248)
10-06-2008 4:01 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by NOT JULIUS
10-06-2008 2:30 PM


Doubting Too writes:

I mean if the earth was placed in just the right distance from the sun--give or take a few deviations from time to time--for life to flourish


Your first mistake is assuming the Earth was "placed" here, while we have a perfectly natural explanation of how the earth came to be where it is now.

As for your combining your own questions, the way it "sounds to the man in the street" has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with it being true. Something being true or not does NOT depend on popular oppinion.


I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by NOT JULIUS, posted 10-06-2008 2:30 PM NOT JULIUS has not yet responded

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 1045 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 19 of 185 (485249)
10-06-2008 4:04 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by NOT JULIUS
10-06-2008 3:52 PM


Re: Weird design
Doubting Too writes:

I am not assuming anything.

Really? then why in the very next sentence you write:
If it continues to be, then the goal for the vastness and "lifelessness" of the universe is to provide a contrast between what is a planet full of life and that one which is empty.
That right there is an assumption.


I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by NOT JULIUS, posted 10-06-2008 3:52 PM NOT JULIUS has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by NOT JULIUS, posted 10-06-2008 4:32 PM Huntard has not yet responded

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 1045 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 21 of 185 (485253)
10-06-2008 4:30 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by NOT JULIUS
10-06-2008 4:19 PM


Doubting too writes:

I believe this is a way of diverting the topic. What about that mountain in the US(?)--i don't remember--where the faces of US presidents were sculpted? Did not somebody design these?


The mountain's called Mount Rushmore.
Then what about "the face on Mars"? Was that designed? It looks like a face after all....


I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by NOT JULIUS, posted 10-06-2008 4:19 PM NOT JULIUS has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by NOT JULIUS, posted 10-06-2008 4:38 PM Huntard has responded

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 1045 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 26 of 185 (485258)
10-06-2008 4:41 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by NOT JULIUS
10-06-2008 4:38 PM


Thanks. So, what do you think were those faces on Mount Rushmore designed or not?

Those faces were designed, we know they were, we have evidence of the design process.

Now, please answer my question. Was the face on Mars designed? I mean, it looks like a face too.


I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by NOT JULIUS, posted 10-06-2008 4:38 PM NOT JULIUS has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by NOT JULIUS, posted 10-06-2008 4:59 PM Huntard has responded

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 1045 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 30 of 185 (485265)
10-06-2008 5:08 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by NOT JULIUS
10-06-2008 4:59 PM


Doubting Too writes:

What's your evidence?


My evidence? Well, let's start with an easy one shall we. Here's the Wiki on the construction of Mount Rushmore:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Construction_of_Mount_Rushmore

Details perfectly well the design process and even the process of reshaping the mountain.

I don't know. I haven't seen it. Have you? Or, was it formed by camera trick? If this is the case, the act of manipulating the camera to form a picture is by design, I guess.

Here's a picture of it: http://a.abcnews.com/images/Technology/apr_mars_face_06921_ssv.jpg

The camera that took this picture was not manipulated. Furthermore, the point I'm trying to make here is just because something LOOKS designed, it doesn't mean it is. We KNOW the face is not designed, it is a natural feature of Mars, and only because the light hit it at that particular angle when the picture was taken did it look like a face.


I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by NOT JULIUS, posted 10-06-2008 4:59 PM NOT JULIUS has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by NOT JULIUS, posted 10-06-2008 5:33 PM Huntard has not yet responded

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 1045 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 47 of 185 (485332)
10-07-2008 1:56 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by NOT JULIUS
10-06-2008 7:24 PM


Re: You Probably Got it Wrong
Doubting Too writes:

First of all I'm not bald. I have hair. They aren't showing though. You see I even have diapers yet. :=):=). I don't get your point. If 99.99999999% is inimical to life, then how is it that life--the GOAL--is here? By accident? By what probability? 1/ 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000. I don't believe you. I'll bet my diaper to your shirt someone--or something to some--designed us. Change your mind and don't be slave to blind chance, please, Uncle?


There you go again, ASSUMING there is a goal to the universe, and that that goal is life.

As for your bet, I'll take you up on it. Please provide me with clear evidence we are indeed "designed" and i will join your cause.

To that "change your mind part" the same goes for you, don't be a part of a system invented to make maintaining control easier, and FREE your mind and think for yourself.


I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by NOT JULIUS, posted 10-06-2008 7:24 PM NOT JULIUS has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by NOT JULIUS, posted 10-07-2008 4:12 PM Huntard has responded

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 1045 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 56 of 185 (485353)
10-07-2008 4:28 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by NOT JULIUS
10-07-2008 4:12 PM


Re: You Probably Got it Wrong
Doubting Too writes:

See my post # 51. May not be clear evidence for you but makes sense.


Alrighty:

Here is analysis:
A. Facts first:

- if there is right distance of the earth to the sun, but WRONG conditions life won’t be possible.
- -if the conditions are right, but distance is wrong life will eventually die.


Yes

B. Interpretation of the facts:
-Were the above facts brought by random chance? Mathematical probability is not on its side.

Mathematical probability is ABSOLUTELY on its side. Do you have ANY idea how many planets there are? Very many of them will be in the Goldilocks zone. So the earth is very common in that way.

- Then, why should the earth’s distance to the sun be right, and the conditions of the earth be right for life to flourish?

Because that's the way the solar system formed.

Why would Gideon, a cook, take the effort of coming up with the right ingredient, the right temperature, even the right equipment to cook? In short, why these conditions or requirements? Because he wants to achieve his GOAL—the perfect muffin ( or whatever is that dish). So, as Gideon’s conditions / requirements are towards a goal ( the muffin), the Earth’s and Sun’s conditions/ requirements--- the rightness of distance and condition—also has a GOAL: Life !

Again you turn it around, we know Gideon's goal because he TOLD us. Nobody told us the universe has a goal. First you need to show there IS a goal, then you need to show this goal to be life, then we can talk about if the placement of the earth is good to achieve this goal. In short, don't just ASSUME there is a goal, provide evidence for this, if not, I will start claiming some very different things to you, and then we're stuck and crying nuh-uh to each other.

I think this GOAL was also expressed by a scientist (?)—I forgot his name—‘ it is as if the universe knew we were coming ( or words to this effect).

Truth does not depend on opinion, it depends on facts.


I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by NOT JULIUS, posted 10-07-2008 4:12 PM NOT JULIUS has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by NOT JULIUS, posted 10-07-2008 7:50 PM Huntard has responded

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 1045 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 68 of 185 (485394)
10-08-2008 1:44 AM
Reply to: Message 63 by NOT JULIUS
10-07-2008 7:50 PM


Re: You Probably Got it Wrong
Doubting Too writes:

Then, show me another earth with life as we know it.


I can't, however that's not the point, the point is you said probability is against us. Since there are gazillions of planets, that even one of them would turn out like earth is VERY probable.

But why was it formed that way?

Because of the laws of physics.

I think I have shown by analysis that there is a goal (post # 51).

No you haven't, you ASSUME there is a goal. If you say there is a goal, you have to point to the evidence supporting this. Saying: "there is life on earth, therefore life is the goal" is circular reasoning and not evidence at all.

True, but truth can also be ferreted out by sound argument.While it is true that appeal to authority is not OK, in some cases their opinion counts because of their research.

Arguments need to be supported with evidence, not assertions.
As for the research......Show me the research that points to:
a) The universe having a goal
b) That goal being life


I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by NOT JULIUS, posted 10-07-2008 7:50 PM NOT JULIUS has not yet responded

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 1045 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 81 of 185 (485511)
10-09-2008 2:04 AM
Reply to: Message 75 by NOT JULIUS
10-08-2008 10:49 PM


Re: Is Life the Result or the Goal
For a while I thought you got me there--changing the word "goal" to "result". Are you a lawyer, by chance?

We are not trying to "get" you, we are trying to teach you something.

Now, let me try to show why life is the "goal" AND the "result".
A series of "why" questions--posed by a child would really reveal this,
I think. Here is a discussion between a child and his Dad

Very well.

Child: Why would life and not death result in the right distance of the sun and earth?

Dad: Because it is the result of natural processes.


Uhm...The right distance of the earth from the sun is indeed the result of natural processes. Once conditions are right, life is inevitable.

2nd why: But why? I am not satisfied. Is process and result enough to explain life? Uh...Uh.. feeling unable to answer the question?

What do you mean why? Again, once the the conditions are right on a planet, life is inevitable. Since there are a gazillion planets, that this one would have the right conditions for life to arise is VERY VERY likely.

Dad: Because, child, the process and/ or the result was what was INTENDED by the designer/ maker. Remember Gideon? Just like our cook Gideon when he specifies these ingredients, and equipment, for baking muffins. His intention (or Goal) is to give us muffins. Kid, while muffins is the result of his baking prowess it is also his goal. He gets satisfaction with that. In other words my child Results and Goals are do not really contradict each other--they are complementary. Kid, if you still aren't satisfied, here is another. If Dad drives you to this street and that street, what would be the RESULT? We arive at the Mall. But, why would Dad take you to the mall? Because your intention--your GOAL--is to silence this smart kid.

I think I explained it better. At least I have evidence for the natural processes.

Dad: Do you now see the point?

Child: Oh, yes I see.


Indoctrination, how bad of daddy. He should encourage the child to find it out on his own. Not put himself up as the ultimate authority on things.

Dad: Now, do you know who designed the earth?

Child: No, his name is not written on it. But, I now know that life is a RESULT and a GOAL.


The earth is NOT designed, please show evidence when you make statements like that. And you still haven't shown ANYWHERE that life is the goal, you again assume it because there is life here! That's not how it works. If there is a designer, and he had an intention, it should be simple to point to him and say; "there he goes! Hey Mr. designer, you did have an intention right?". Instead you assume he did.

Dad: Suppose, I tell you he is GOD.

Child: I may believe you, but there seems to be no proof--except that there is INTELLIGENCEdisplayed here. But, Dad, can we accept INTELLIGENCE without GOD.


You lie to your child? We all know it's the Flying spaghetti monster that created the earth. See what I did there? You can tell a child anything you like, but it's best to back up your statements with facts.

Dad: Does that sound reasonable to you? Can you have a functioning brain--the seat of intelligence--without a person?

Child: It's hard to believe.

Dad: Whew! I finally got ya, I think.


Intelligence without a body? Sure! Does artificial intelligence ring a bell?

Deftil and the rest trying to falsify P3. Did you get the point?

Yes, I get the point, and it's still false.


I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by NOT JULIUS, posted 10-08-2008 10:49 PM NOT JULIUS has not yet responded

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 1045 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 93 of 185 (485690)
10-10-2008 5:32 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by NOT JULIUS
10-10-2008 3:45 PM


Re: Why are u are giving correct answers to the WRONG question?
Doubting Too writes:

Most of you are answering the question HOW? My questions are WHY?
Why the laws of physics? why the correct distance? Why the natural
processes? why is the condition of earth just right for life?


That's the same question as asking why an apple tastes like an apple, it's because it's an apple! The natural processes of the universe act that way because that's the way they act. There is no why. It is inevitable that of the gazillion of planets at least one of them got just the right conditions for life to arise. There is no why needed for this. You could claim that god intended the universe to be like this and initiated the big bang, I'm not going to argue that point because there's frankly no evidence for anything at that point and so everything can be claimed about it. But other then that there is no reason for why planet earth has life.

I am sensing that you are avoiding the issue. Trying to confuse me or other readers.

Avoiding the issue? I answered all your points, you just respond by saying Nuh-uh and think you have refuted my arguments, you did not.

My guess is you are afraid to answer the question WHY?

No I'm not, so, here we go again : There is no why.

"Why" questions require reason/purpose/ or goal that's why.

Yes, and as we have explained again and again, there is NO apparent goal to the universe, simply saying that there is does NOT make it so. You need evidence for those kinds of statements, and sadly, you haven't provided any.

And, I sense that you won't admit this.It's scary for you because it will make P3 valid...and...

No no NO, I don't care if it's valid or not, but to make something valid you need to present EVIDENCE. You have not done so, you have asserted time and again that the universe has a goal without providing so much as a shred of evidence, other than your personal beliefs and assertions, that's not how it works.

Let me illustrate the difference between HOW and WHY?

Ok.

Fact: Salmon goes upstream--overcoming great obstacles--on the way.

Yes

How does the Salmon do it? By means of natural process, bodily clock, perhaps, etc.

Don't know much about salmon, but yes, that sounds about right.

Why does Salmon do it? It wants to breed. But why? To pursue its GOAL to preserve and continue the salmon's specie. In other words, its goal is LIFE.

Salmon don't WANT anything, they're animals, they don't have "needs" the way we humans do. So, you're wrong here too, sorry.


I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by NOT JULIUS, posted 10-10-2008 3:45 PM NOT JULIUS has not yet responded

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 1045 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 95 of 185 (485699)
10-10-2008 6:17 PM
Reply to: Message 94 by NOT JULIUS
10-10-2008 5:36 PM


Re: Closing Argument: Holiday & Someone lost his cool
I'd like Huntard, please, to give the counter closing argument.

Thank you, and may I first say I enjoyed the debate with you.

Alright here we go:

Did you notice that I did not try to find proof in science, but in syllogism--a part of philosophy? The proof is found in You Probably Got it Wrong inMessage 35

Ok, let's see if the argument itself is valid then.

The contentious premise is # 3--"The right distance of the earth to the sun, and the right conditions on earth is towards a goal--life on earth."

This statement is an assertion, nowhere in the statement do you show anything that would point to the earth having a goal, and that goal being life. You are asserting that the right distance from the earth to the sun and the right conditions on the earth point to a goal, without showing HOW they point to a goal. You're simply saying: "there is life on planet earth because the conditions are right and the conditions being right points to there being a goal, life". Of course there is life when the conditions are right, what you have to do is show HOW these conditions point to there being a goal. Simply saying they are does not make it so. You see ANY planet that is the right distance form its sun and has the right conditions will give rise to life, it doesn't matter if that planet happens to be planet earth or a totally different planet in a totally different galaxy, if life has a chance to arise it will. The fact that earth has life is not indicative for there being a goal to earth. While it is not my place to argue your religious beliefs, I do find it important to point out to you that this of course is not a premise, but a conclusion. You can't use conclusions as your premise. That botches up the argument. What your argument should have looked like is something like this:

P1 there is life on earth
P2 This is due to the right conditions being present on the earth
P3 There are things about these conditions that point towards an intended goal (list these things)
Conclusion: The life on planet earth was a goal.

Simply saying that the the fact that earth has life points to life being the goal here DOES NOT FOLLOW. I did not miss you point, it's just not a valid philosophical argument.

One tried--and others joined-- to disprove it by making a wrong analogy--the pothole and puddle. There is really a big difference between that analogy--and that of the conditions stated above. Literally, and in complexity.

No not really, you kind of missed the point.

The point they were trying to make is that saying that the pothole fits the puddle so perfectly is the same as saying that earth fits life so perfectly, when in fact it is the other way around. The puddle fits the pothole perfectly, like life fits the earth perfectly. The puddle couldn't have formed any other shape then the shape of the pothole, nor could life have taken any other route on planet earth. That's the point they were trying to make.

I don't expect you really to accept--as of now--this kind of reasoning. But, someday you will--when you realize that science ends ( the how questions) where philosophy begins ( the why's). At that time, you'll say, "Aha! there are lots of evidence for design".

I don't accept your argument because it is flawed, not because I don't want to.

I'm not going to argue anymore. This is just my wish: that someday, Huntard, you'll find out that there are answers to the "Why" questions of this universe.

I have found my answer : "there is no why". You may not like it, but I get by pretty darn well with it, and that, to me, is ALL that matters.

Hope to see you around some more :)


I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by NOT JULIUS, posted 10-10-2008 5:36 PM NOT JULIUS has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 100 by NOT JULIUS, posted 10-17-2008 5:54 PM Huntard has not yet responded
 Message 101 by NOT JULIUS, posted 10-17-2008 5:56 PM Huntard has responded

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 1045 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 106 of 185 (486493)
10-21-2008 12:08 PM
Reply to: Message 101 by NOT JULIUS
10-17-2008 5:56 PM


Re: I'm Sorry I Broke a promise--Is it a question of Identity
Hello again doubting too, was away for the latter part of last week, so here's my somewhat delayed response.
Doubting Too writes:

I remember answering almost the same question from a kid, "why does banana taste like banana". I tried explaining it through "how's"--chemical composition, etc. But he kept asking why. Finally, I said a banana taste like a banana because if all fruits--apples, oranges, etc--would taste like banana, we would die or boredom. Finally, he accepted that answer because he would not like his apple or orange to taste like banana.

And there is a lesson here--even the variety of taste that we have (as opposed to a monotonous one) is proof that the GOAL of the designer of fruits was to preserve life--so we won't die of boredom.


Wow...just wow.... OK, right, since there's been enough ridiculing this statement already, I will simply ask you to provide any evidence for:
a)There was a designer for fruit.
b)That his goal was to make all fruit taste different.
c)That we would in fact DIE of boredom if all fruits tasted the same.

Thanks for that. But, however you put it there is a goal. And, if there is a goal then it is designed--by definition

Yes, yet you have failed to show there actually IS a goal, again you simply assert it here.

Finally, I think the real question is not evidence of design. It is a question of the designer's identity. His problem is he did not put "Made by..." If he did, there would be no need of this debate or even this forum. Would you agree?

To discuss who the designer might be, you first have to show that he designed anything at all, else there's no point in speculating on who he might be. I agree of course that if there was a designer AND his identity was known, then we wouldn't need to discuss it, but that's not really the case, now is it?

I have no more desire to answer questions here. I think I have said enough. :=) :=)

Ok, fine, but don't expect people to just swallow everything you say. Just because you THINK it is right doesn't mean it IS, that would require showing evidence.


I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by NOT JULIUS, posted 10-17-2008 5:56 PM NOT JULIUS has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by NOT JULIUS, posted 10-21-2008 6:16 PM Huntard has responded

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 1045 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 112 of 185 (486552)
10-22-2008 12:37 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by NOT JULIUS
10-21-2008 6:16 PM


Re: Why are you tempting me--For those who want to know more
Doubting Too writes:

You are the TEMPTER! ( really a complement, my friend).


Thank you :D

I broke my promise again. But, for the interest of those who want to know more, please follow this link: http://www.templeton.org/purpose/pdfs/bq_universe.pdf

Breaking a promise for a good reason is OK in my book, I'll check out your link, I will however not debate it here, since it's kinda against the forum rules.

The question raised was : Does the universe have a purpose?

The answers from these men of science ranged from No, Unlikely, Perhaps, Yes, Certainly, etc. Fine reading.


Ok, so it's undoubtedly a nice read, but as far as an argument goes, it's worthless, as it's an appeal to authority.

My friend, I could use the previous argument you posted to bolster my argument. But, I would prefer that the reader go to that link. It is to my mind, NEUTRAL.

How would you go about bolstering your argument with a counter-argument? Again, I'm sure the link is fascinating, but it's still bare speculation.

Think again: if all fruits tasted like banana, it would be boring. Boredom kills. So, the Purposer / Designer of the fruit did it... so that ungrateful men would enjoy and have life, instead.

Boredom DOES NOT kill. I'm bored from time to time, yet I'm still here. I don't even eat that much fruit (I know, I'm a bad boy) So even if I did eat some from time to time and it tasted like banana, I wouldn't mind one bit.


I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by NOT JULIUS, posted 10-21-2008 6:16 PM NOT JULIUS has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 131 by NOT JULIUS, posted 10-23-2008 1:16 PM Huntard has responded

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 1045 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 113 of 185 (486555)
10-22-2008 12:54 PM
Reply to: Message 108 by NOT JULIUS
10-21-2008 6:42 PM


Re: A sampling of their Answers
Doubting Too writes:

Hello Huntard and the rest of the gang,

http://templeton.org/purpose/pdfs/bq_universe.pdf

Here is a sampling of portions of their answers:


Right, let's have a little look, shall we:

L. Krauss, Professor of Physics writes:

Unlikely.
Perhaps you hoped for a stronger statement, one way or the other. But as a scientist I don’t believe I can make one. While nothing in biology, chemistry, physics, geology, astronomy, or cosmology has ever provided direct evidence of purpose in nature, science can never unambiguously prove that there is no such purpose. As Carl Sagan said, in another con¬text: Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Of course, nothing would stop science from uncovering positive evidence of divine guidance and purpose if it were attainable. For example, tomorrow night if we look up at the stars and they have been rearranged into a pattern that reads, “I am here,” I think even the most hard-nosed scientific skeptic would suspect something was up.”

I think this is quite right, science can never PROVE there is no designer. However looking at the current state of things, there is NOTHING that points to there being one. If you want to believe that there is one, fine, but don't go shouting that it's "obvious" cause it isn't.

D.Gelemter, Professor of computer science writes:

Yes.
Consider this question: Do the Earth and mankind have a purpose? If so, then the universe does too, ipso facto. If not, the universe might still have (some other) purpose; but I don’t have to face that contingency, because I believe we do have one…


Bolding mine.
See, he BELIEVES there is a purpose, he doesn't say, this and that POINTS to there being a purpose, no, he BELIEVES there is. In other words, it's an assertion.

Namely, to defeat and rise above our animal natures; to create goodness, beauty, and holiness where only physics and animal life once existed; to create what might be (if we succeed) the only tiny pinprick of goodness in the universe—which is otherwise (so far as we know) morally null and void. If no other such project exists anywhere in the cosmos, our victory would change the nature of the universe. If there are similar projects elsewhere, more power to them; but our own task remains unchanged.

Bit of a pessimist isn't he? Talking about how dark and evil the universe is. But, as I'm sure you have noted, this is his personal BELIEF, not an undeniable fact.

But why rise above and not blend into nature? Equivalently, from a Western viewpoint: why did the Judeo-Christian tradition replace the pagan idea of gods made in man’s image with a revolutionary inversion, man made in God’s?

The god of the bible is as much made in man's image as the pagan gods.

Why should we be goaded not to be ourselves but to be better than ourselves?
Why seek goodness?

Because that's beneficial for the survival of the species.

Doubting Too writes:

They were talking about the universe having a purpose--and that's a big thing.


Yes, it is, and as I'm sure you've noted, neither of them provide ANY evidence for it having a purpose.

What would be their answer to the question: Why does not all fruits taste like banana--is there a PURPOSE to that? Hmm..

Well, I'm pretty sure the first guy would look at you very strangely when you asked him that, in fact, I think the other one would also.

Again, I don;t eat that many fruit, so if all fruit tasted like banana, I wouldn't care. Furthermore, I get bored once and again, and I certainly don't kill myself in those moments, nor would I kill myself over anything as silly as all fruit tasting like bananas.


I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by NOT JULIUS, posted 10-21-2008 6:42 PM NOT JULIUS has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by Agobot, posted 10-22-2008 1:12 PM Huntard has responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021