Message 167 of 168 (308524)
05-02-2006 2:09 PM
Reply to: Message 164 by iano
05-02-2006 12:23 PM
Re: Game, Seti, Match...?
As I said before IF it were possible to analyse our designs and come up with say 400 attributes common to intelligent design AND each (or very many) of these attributes were found operating in nature at the same points (timing, function, redundancy etc) along a hypothetical yet-calibrated-against-humans design methodology, THEN we have a theory supported by evidence: Intelligent design theoretically occurred in those objects investigated. At that point ToE and ID could slug it out for the title.
1. What you outline here already exists as a branch of Anthroplogy and is perfectly valid when applied to observations of human behavior. This leads us to point two:-
2. Why on earth would/should we assume that human design practice is anything like that of a creator we have never observed?
RjBs argument about producing God first is a kindergaarten level attempt at short circuiting discussion. His conclusion might be that one cannot conclude. But that pre-supposes that the case CANNOT be made. Which is one I read you yourself making all too frequently
No it's a perfectly reasonable request that you have consistently ducked.
You say, "This was designed by something".
I ask, "What?".
Are you seriously arguing that such a basic question is unfounded? I'd say that not being allowed to ask "what?" constitutes the short-circuiting of a discussion!
If, alternatively, you were to term my query as "cutting through the b*llshit", then you'd be correct.
Like other ID apologists, you pretend to want open discussion, but then move quickly to lock it down (or divert it) when it attempts to query the nature of the creator.
I have one further point about human design mirroring that of a creator...
If you somehow did show that human design was related to that of the creator (difficult without ever showing a creator!) then one could propose that the growing human use of computer simulations/learning algorithms show that the "creator" might conceiveably have designed an evolutionary process that was left to run. This somewhat subverts the "hands-on" concept of ID, and tends towards the Evolutionary Theist's position!
MSG TO ADMIN: If too OT, perhaps you could invite Iano to start a thread about his "Human Design as a Marker for Creator Design" concept?
This message has been edited by RickJB, 05-02-2006 02:14 PM
|This message is a reply to:|
| ||Message 164 by iano, posted 05-02-2006 12:23 PM|| ||iano has not yet responded|