| lucid | |
| idunno |
| Posted 07/06/12 at 04:23 AM | Reply with quote #2 |
|
We've missed you lucid. |
| Loading... | |
| BeefEraser15 |
| Posted 07/06/12 at 01:51 PM | Reply with quote #3 |
|
His argument isn’t sound. It does raise the question of natural evil (e.g., Why would a good God allow aging/disease/natural disasters?), but nevertheless, pointing to all of these things doesn’t mean that the universe is completely devoid of design. The whole universe is governed by natural laws (e.g., gravity holds galaxies together and creates planetary orbits), which point to an underlying design or rational structure to the world. Again, that doesn’t necessarily point towards a benevolent God, but it does point you towards a powerful mind that gave the universe order. |
| Loading... | |
| Lawlessone777 |
| Posted 07/06/12 at 02:06 PM | Reply with quote #4 |
|
| You've posted this video before, Lucid, and his argument is flawed. It's much the same as an argument against design in biological complexity. Perceived flaws do not equate a lack of design, we infer design from the fact that random, unordered events are impossible as an explanation for why the level of complexity we see even exists. |
| Loading... | |
| mazzgolf |
| Posted 07/06/12 at 02:20 PM | Reply with quote #5 |
|
My new car breaks down all the time - its a piece of garbage with a stupid design. Therefore, it is not designed.
I'm sure there is flaws in that as well, but as you can see, its not enough just to claim "stupid design" in order to further conclude "there is NO design."
Perhaps God is more of an artist than a scientist - and he enjoys the majesty of his creation as it unfolds, imperfect as it is. Perhaps the universe HAD to be this big and void in order to support what life is on this planet (I would say the universe had to be the size that it is, devoid of much of anything, because without its size, we'd have no stars to produce the heavy particles that later make up planets and life on this planet).
I will concede he makes a passioned argument that things in this world aren't close to being perfect and life, itself, is very precarious even in this little corner of the universe where life does exist. It's almost as if it is a miracle that life exists at all :-) |
| Loading... | |
| warpedpro |
| Posted 07/06/12 at 02:38 PM | Reply with quote #6 |
|
god is omniscient, isn't he/it?
also, prior to god creating anytihng, there isn't any information is there? if so, how could god create or design anything without the information? |
| Loading... | |
| Lawlessone777 |
| Posted 07/06/12 at 02:40 PM | Reply with quote #7 |
|
Quote: god is omniscient, isn't he/it?
also, prior to god creating anytihng, there isn't any information is there? if so, how could god create or design anything without the information?
Wait....what? You're saying God needed blueprints to make the universe? Please clarify. |
| Loading... | |
| Geneticist |
| Posted 07/06/12 at 02:41 PM | Reply with quote #8 |
|
The real problem with Intelligent Design is that its proponents cannot clearly define the central concepts.
In particular I am thinking of "information" as it pertains to Biology. They talk about increases and decreases in Genetic Information, but they can never clearly define what it is they are talking about and when presented with examples wrought by Evolution, they reject it as not representative of a change in genetic information. |
| Loading... | |
| mazzgolf |
| Posted 07/06/12 at 02:53 PM | Reply with quote #9 |
|
I, personally, try to stay out of the biological evolution fray as much as possible (my last post not withstanding mainly because I see no philosophical reason why God could not use evolution as a mechanism to create and grow his creation over time. I see many other natural theological arguments that can do a complete end-run around biological evolution so it really doesn't need to be argued either way in those instances. So, I'm not one of those that is fearful of biological evolution as somehow putting an end to God.
I find that my problem with those on the atheistic evolutionist side of the debate is that they cross over the line from science to philosophy and either don't know or realize it, or refuse to acknowledge it. For example, to say that there is no directedness in evolution is merely to presuppose naturalism is true. We have no idea that IF God exists that he used evolution as the mechanism to advance his creation. I'm not accusing you of this, Geneticist, but I only bring it up as a possible flaw in the atheist evolution account. |
| Loading... | |
| Geneticist |
| Posted 07/06/12 at 02:57 PM | Reply with quote #10 |
|
Quote: Originally Posted by mazzgolfI, personally, try to stay out of the biological evolution fray as much as possible (my last post not withstanding  mainly because I see no philosophical reason why God could not use evolution as a mechanism to create and grow his creation over time. I see many other natural theological arguments that can do a complete end-run around biological evolution so it really doesn't need to be argued either way in those instances. So, I'm not one of those that is fearful of biological evolution as somehow putting an end to God. I find that my problem with those on the atheistic evolutionist side of the debate is that they cross over the line from science to philosophy and either don't know or realize it, or refuse to acknowledge it. For example, to say that there is no directedness in evolution is merely to presuppose naturalism is true. We have no idea that IF God exists that he used evolution as the mechanism to advance his creation. I'm not accusing you of this, Geneticist, but I only bring it up as a possible flaw in the atheist evolution account.
You're implying I am an athiest....on what grounds? |
| Loading... | |
| Lawlessone777 |
| Posted 07/06/12 at 03:00 PM | Reply with quote #11 |
|
Quote: You're implying I am an athiest....on what grounds?
I got no beef with your posting style, as you haven't been antagonistic, but there is a bit of whiff of it in there. lol |
| Loading... | |
| mazzgolf |
| Posted 07/06/12 at 03:01 PM | Reply with quote #12 |
|
| I didn't mean to imply that at all; apologies if it came out saying otherwise. I have no idea what your stance is regarding your theological viewpoints. I only wanted to point out that there can be flaws on both sides of this biological evolution debate. For the theistic evolution/ID folks, you made the point they sometimes are not clear about their definitions. I wanted to point out a flaw on the atheistic side of the debate regarding their philosophical presuppositions. I didn't mean to imply I knew which side you agreed with (the theist/atheist side of the debate). |
| Loading... | |
| Geneticist |
| Posted 07/06/12 at 03:07 PM | Reply with quote #13 |
|
Quote: Originally Posted by Lawlessone777Quote: You're implying I am an athiest....on what grounds? I got no beef with your posting style, as you haven't been antagonistic, but there is a bit of whiff of it in there. lol
Ha. I'm just blunt. Maybe its a leftover from the military. |
| Loading... | |
| Geneticist |
| Posted 07/06/12 at 03:10 PM | Reply with quote #14 |
|
Quote: Originally Posted by mazzgolf
I didn't mean to imply that at all; apologies if it came out saying otherwise. I have no idea what your stance is regarding your theological viewpoints. I only wanted to point out that there can be flaws on both sides of this biological evolution debate. For the theistic evolution/ID folks, you made the point they sometimes are not clear about their definitions. I wanted to point out a flaw on the atheistic side of the debate regarding their philosophical presuppositions. I didn't mean to imply I knew which side you agreed with (the theist/atheist side of the debate).
To be clear, I don't think there is any ambiguity in the terminology of theistic evolution. Other than the presumption of philosophical naturalism, theistic evolution understand does not use ambiguous terminology when it comes to Science because it is the same terminology as used by Scientists.
I am a theistic evolutionist. |
| Loading... | |
| TheProblemOfAtheism |
| Posted 07/06/12 at 03:15 PM | Reply with quote #15 |
|
Tyson's ignorance is showing, unfortunately.
I've always believed you shouldn't let scientists think they are experts at anything else other than their field of specialization. |
| Loading... | |
