Posts: 4196
Threads: 60
Joined: September 8, 2011
Reputation:
30
RE: Atheism vs. God's Existence
May 19, 2016 at 6:54 pm
What is god? One is expected to believe in what? No theist has defined a god, yet they believe in one.
You make people miserable and there's nothing they can do about it, just like god.
-- Homer Simpson
God has no place within these walls, just as facts have no place within organized religion.
-- Superintendent Chalmers
Science is like a blabbermouth who ruins a movie by telling you how it ends. There are some things we don't want to know. Important things.
-- Ned Flanders
Once something's been approved by the government, it's no longer immoral.
-- The Rev Lovejoy
Posts: 44664
Threads: 532
Joined: July 24, 2013
Reputation:
109
RE: Atheism vs. God's Existence
May 19, 2016 at 6:56 pm
(This post was last modified: May 19, 2016 at 6:57 pm by BrianSoddingBoru4.)
(May 19, 2016 at 6:08 pm)AAA Wrote: (May 19, 2016 at 5:46 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: No, he really doesn't. I mean, he really REALLY doesn't.
Boru Are you sure? He mentions several times in his book how Darwin explained the design without a designer. He also says: Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose. Plus dictionary.com defined design as: purpose, planning, or intention that exists or is thought to exist behind an action, fact, or material object.
Biological systems definitely exhibit purpose behind their actions especially on the cellular level. Everything is coordinated to respond to stimuli in the most beneficial way for the organism. Do you really think that biological systems don't exhibit apparent design?
Stimbo beat me to it. The key word in your mined quote is 'appearance'. Dawkins uses this word, and the accompanying phrase, as hook upon which to hang the very persuasive argument that biological systems appear to be designed when, in fact, they are not. If you would read Dawkins' books and papers on the subject, instead of simply relying on the mined quotes you pick up from whatever creationist website is currently giving you a chubby, you might grasp this.
Here's an experiment. Go and visit Dr. Dawkins. Tell him that you know he believes that life is designed (as defined by your online dictionary) and refuse to listen to his answers. 8-3 odds you give him another stroke.
Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax
Posts: 624
Threads: 1
Joined: December 4, 2015
Reputation:
1
RE: Atheism vs. God's Existence
May 19, 2016 at 6:57 pm
(May 19, 2016 at 6:42 pm)Stimbo Wrote: (May 19, 2016 at 6:08 pm)AAA Wrote: Are you sure? He mentions several times in his book how Darwin explained the design without a designer. He also says: Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose.
Yes, he used the phrase "gives the appearance" for a reason.
http://www.richannel.org/christmas-lectu...id-objects
Yeah, he thinks they appear designed. Obviously he sees design, but thinks it is the result of mutation and natural selection.
Posts: 44664
Threads: 532
Joined: July 24, 2013
Reputation:
109
RE: Atheism vs. God's Existence
May 19, 2016 at 7:01 pm
Quote:Yeah, he thinks they appear designed. Obviously he sees design, but thinks it is the result of mutation and natural selection.
Think, really, really hard about the word 'appear'. Biological systems 'appear' designed in precisely the same way that a stage magician can 'appear' to saw a woman in half.
Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax
Posts: 624
Threads: 1
Joined: December 4, 2015
Reputation:
1
RE: Atheism vs. God's Existence
May 19, 2016 at 7:03 pm
(May 19, 2016 at 6:56 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: (May 19, 2016 at 6:08 pm)AAA Wrote: Are you sure? He mentions several times in his book how Darwin explained the design without a designer. He also says: Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose. Plus dictionary.com defined design as: purpose, planning, or intention that exists or is thought to exist behind an action, fact, or material object.
Biological systems definitely exhibit purpose behind their actions especially on the cellular level. Everything is coordinated to respond to stimuli in the most beneficial way for the organism. Do you really think that biological systems don't exhibit apparent design?
Stimbo beat me to it. The key word in your mined quote is 'appearance'. Dawkins uses this word, and the accompanying phrase, as hook upon which to hang the very persuasive argument that biological systems appear to be designed when, in fact, they are not. If you would read Dawkins' books and papers on the subject, instead of simply relying on the mined quotes you pick up from whatever creationist website is currently giving you a chubby, you might grasp this.
Here's an experiment. Go and visit Dr. Dawkins. Tell him that you know he believes that life is designed (as defined by your online dictionary) and refuse to listen to his answers. 8-3 odds you give him another stroke.
Boru
Obviously he doesn't think that the design is the result of a mind. However, if I were to ask Dawkins if he thought natural selection is a designing force, I bet he would say yes. This is what I said at the beginning anyways. It leads to design without requiring a designer. And it is no "fact" that they are not intelligently designed, and I did read The God Delusion this past semester.
Posts: 624
Threads: 1
Joined: December 4, 2015
Reputation:
1
RE: Atheism vs. God's Existence
May 19, 2016 at 7:09 pm
(May 19, 2016 at 7:01 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Quote:Yeah, he thinks they appear designed. Obviously he sees design, but thinks it is the result of mutation and natural selection.
Think, really, really hard about the word 'appear'. Biological systems 'appear' designed in precisely the same way that a stage magician can 'appear' to saw a woman in half.
Boru
That's just an assertion. Maybe they appear designed the way a person genuinely getting chopped in half appears to be chopped in half. Why do we have to assume biological systems are counter-intuitive?
Posts: 30732
Threads: 204
Joined: July 19, 2011
Reputation:
141
RE: Atheism vs. God's Existence
May 19, 2016 at 7:11 pm
(May 19, 2016 at 7:03 pm)AAA Wrote: (May 19, 2016 at 6:56 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Stimbo beat me to it. The key word in your mined quote is 'appearance'. Dawkins uses this word, and the accompanying phrase, as hook upon which to hang the very persuasive argument that biological systems appear to be designed when, in fact, they are not. If you would read Dawkins' books and papers on the subject, instead of simply relying on the mined quotes you pick up from whatever creationist website is currently giving you a chubby, you might grasp this.
Here's an experiment. Go and visit Dr. Dawkins. Tell him that you know he believes that life is designed (as defined by your online dictionary) and refuse to listen to his answers. 8-3 odds you give him another stroke.
Boru
Obviously he doesn't think that the design is the result of a mind. However, if I were to ask Dawkins if he thought natural selection is a designing force, I bet he would say yes. This is what I said at the beginning anyways. It leads to design without requiring a designer. And it is no "fact" that they are not intelligently designed, and I did read The God Delusion this past semester.
You might be better off sticking to what someone does say, rather than what your fevered mind imagines the might say.
Oh, and equivocate less. It's dishonest.
Posts: 624
Threads: 1
Joined: December 4, 2015
Reputation:
1
RE: Atheism vs. God's Existence
May 19, 2016 at 7:14 pm
(May 19, 2016 at 7:11 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: (May 19, 2016 at 7:03 pm)AAA Wrote: Obviously he doesn't think that the design is the result of a mind. However, if I were to ask Dawkins if he thought natural selection is a designing force, I bet he would say yes. This is what I said at the beginning anyways. It leads to design without requiring a designer. And it is no "fact" that they are not intelligently designed, and I did read The God Delusion this past semester.
You might be better off sticking to what someone does say, rather than what your fevered mind imagines the might say.
Oh, and equivocate less. It's dishonest.
Ok, forget about Dawkins then. Do you think that natural selection is a designing force?
Posts: 30732
Threads: 204
Joined: July 19, 2011
Reputation:
141
RE: Atheism vs. God's Existence
May 19, 2016 at 7:23 pm
Absolutely not. Design implies intent which implies agency, neither of which is a property of natural selection.
Posts: 66524
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
160
RE: Atheism vs. God's Existence
May 19, 2016 at 7:25 pm
(This post was last modified: May 19, 2016 at 7:25 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
@ AAA
Would it matter if he did, if it wasn't...anymore that it matters that you think there's a designing force, when there isn't?
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
|
