Essential Links ▼
Message Coding Help ►
Posts of the Month ►
Document Library ►
No we're not.
We are foolish to settle on the least evidenced explanation when there are other explanations with more evidence and more explanatory power.
It has nothing to do with natural and not natural. We prefer the better explanation, that's all.
This is bullshit on so many levels. Here's two of them:
First, we can experience intelligence, i.e., our own. So you are 100% incorrect when you claim we cannot observe intelligence. I am experiencing my own intelligence right now.
Second, by your logic we'd have to say that gravity isn't a real thing because we only know of it by its result: stuff crashing together.
By your logic we'd have to say that hunger doesn't exist because we only know of it by its result: things eat once in a while and die if they don't.
Yet, almost everything known in science is known indirectly based on the affect it has over its surrounding environment.
Thus, we can observe intelligence and even when we cannot, indirect observation is just as good as direct observation.
Is there any reason we should throw this all away just for your silly pet theory?
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.1Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022