Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9077 total)
692 online now:
dwise1, Tanypteryx (2 members, 690 visitors)
Newest Member: Contrarian
Post Volume: Total: 894,031 Year: 5,143/6,534 Month: 563/794 Week: 54/135 Day: 6/25 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is A Materialist View Less Parsimonious?
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2201
Joined: 07-15-2003


(1)
Message 23 of 42 (789110)
08-10-2016 5:25 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by mike the wiz
08-09-2016 7:55 AM


Every atom an assumption
mike the wiz writes:

I am saying for one part of the materialistic explanation (life's diversity), we would have to invoke millions of transitionals but if an animal kind was created then as creationists we don't have to assume millions of ancestors, so there are far more assumptions to that one part of the story.

Two things about that:

1. If you are going to count every transitional as a separate assumption then by the same token we ‘materialists’ can easily trump you by saying that in your creation story God put every atom in the universe in its place. I’ll let you figure out for yourself the number of assumptions this would entail if we allow the use of this, frankly, silly kind of reasoning. Which we won’t, so you’re off the hook.

2. Although the fossil record is necessarily incomplete, many - indeed very many - transitionals have been found. They are not assumptions, they are actual facts of reality. And by induction, a technique you seem to be so fond of, we can conclude that transitionals must have existed for every pair of closely related species we care to think of, especially so if we consider the logical implications of the principle of evolution: imperfect replication under natural selection.


"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by mike the wiz, posted 08-09-2016 7:55 AM mike the wiz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by mike the wiz, posted 08-11-2016 2:28 PM Parasomnium has replied

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2201
Joined: 07-15-2003


(2)
Message 42 of 42 (789248)
08-12-2016 4:02 AM
Reply to: Message 26 by mike the wiz
08-11-2016 2:28 PM


Re: Every atom an assumption
mike the wiz writes:

Atoms aren't assumptions, they exist already. I don't see why the atoms need to be placed.

You don't get the point I was making. It's silly to count the number of transitionals as so many assumptions, just as it is silly to count every arrangement of atoms in God's supposed creation as such. That's why I dismissed these arguments. If you keep using this kind of reasoning we might have to upgrade the qualification of 'silly' to 'disingenuous'.

Less silly would be to count the phenomenon of transition between species as one assumption, and God's handiwork as another. And since there's no credible evidence for the latter and lots of evidence for transition, it's one-nil for materialism in the great game of Parsimony.

mike the wiz writes:

These features are usually shared because they are the best design for the job. Take bats, oil birds and whales, they all have echolocation. It's simply the best design.

If it is, then why doesn't man, the supposed pinnacle of God's creation, have it?


"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by mike the wiz, posted 08-11-2016 2:28 PM mike the wiz has taken no action

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022