Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: April 19, 2024, 1:35 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Help refuting an Intelligent design argument
#11
RE: Help refuting an Intelligent Design Argument
(May 5, 2019 at 10:57 pm)Jrouche Wrote:
(May 5, 2019 at 10:50 pm)vulcanlogician Wrote: IDK if I have time to help you draft an argument, but you can bounce ideas of me. What's this 3 pronged argument?
Thanks for helping.  1) Intelligence is known to cause effects exhibiting information rich and specified complexity.
              
                              2) The universe and life are effects that exhibit information rich in specified complexity.

                              3) Therefore, intelligence is a possible cause for the universe and life. 

    Thanks for any assistance you can provide.

    John

Intelligence is rich in information and specified complexity

1. Intelligence causes intelligence.
Humans do produce humans.

2. The universe and life are complex.
I suppose so.

3. Intelligence is a product that forms within a universe. It cannot create universes.
Insanity - Doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result
Reply
#12
RE: Help refuting an Intelligent Design Argument
Remember that ID is a repackaged and renamed creationism.

A chrome plated, polished turd is still a turd.
Dying to live, living to die.
Reply
#13
RE: Help refuting an Intelligent Design Argument
(May 5, 2019 at 11:43 pm)The Valkyrie Wrote: Remember that ID is a repackaged and renamed creationism.

A chrome plated, polished turd is still a turd.

V, Thanks for your input. Yes, I have given him lengthy explanations and even pointed out it was defeated in court and could not be taught in science classes because it was religious based and they used God in the premises.They then changed it to Intelligent Designer or agent to skirt the legal arguments and it was still rejected. Sigh...
Reply
#14
RE: Help refuting an Intelligent Design Argument
Ok. I'm back.

Quote:Specified complexity is a concept proposed by William Dembski and used by him and others to promote the pseudoscientific arguments of intelligent design. According to Dembski, the concept can formalize a property that singles out patterns that are both specified and complex, where in Dembski's terminology, a specified pattern is one that admits short descriptions, whereas a complex pattern is one that is unlikely to occur by chance. Proponents of intelligent design use specified complexity as one of their two main arguments...  .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specified_complexity

Yay! Your friend's argument contains a pseudoscientific concept that was invented for the express purpose of making ID arguments intelligible.

I neither have the time nor energy to parse through this bullshit, but this wiki article covers some of the basic criticisms of specified complexity and should serve as a fine starting point for your research.
Reply
#15
RE: Help refuting an Intelligent Design Argument
(May 5, 2019 at 11:59 pm)vulcanlogician Wrote: Ok. I'm back.

Quote:Specified complexity is a concept proposed by William Dembski and used by him and others to promote the pseudoscientific arguments of intelligent design. According to Dembski, the concept can formalize a property that singles out patterns that are both specified and complex, where in Dembski's terminology, a specified pattern is one that admits short descriptions, whereas a complex pattern is one that is unlikely to occur by chance. Proponents of intelligent design use specified complexity as one of their two main arguments, alongside .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specified_complexity

Yay! Your friend's argument contains a pseudoscientific concept that was invented for the express purpose of making ID arguments intelligible.

I neither have the time nor energy to parse through this bullshit, but this wiki article covers some of the basic criticisms of specified complexity and should serve as a fine starting point for your research.
Thanks for taking the time--I knew it was all bullshit.
Reply
#16
RE: Help refuting an Intelligent Design Argument
Tell him that whenever I see umbrellas I see rain, therefore umbrellas must cause rain Dunno
No God, No fear.
Know God, Know fear.
Reply
#17
RE: Help refuting an Intelligent Design Argument
(May 6, 2019 at 12:13 am)ignoramus Wrote: Tell him that whenever I see umbrellas I see rain, therefore umbrellas must cause rain Dunno

LOL--Thanks, I'll toss that in the vat--best, John
Reply
#18
RE: Help refuting an Intelligent Design Argument
(May 6, 2019 at 12:13 am)ignoramus Wrote: Tell him that whenever I see umbrellas I see rain, therefore umbrellas must cause rain Dunno

No! No! No! You've got it all wrong. Mary Poppins causes rain and (just by coincidence), she happens to have an umbrella. But her umbrella isn't the cause, she is. Also, chimney sweeps are the cause of soot. Those were my two main takeaways from that movie.
Reply
#19
RE: Help refuting an Intelligent Design Argument
1) The Big Bang, Intelligence and evolution are known to cause effects exhibiting information rich and specified complexity.


2) The universe and life are effects that exhibit information rich in specified complexity.


3) Therefore, the Big Bang, Intelligence and evolution are possible causes for the universe and life
Religion is the top shelf of the supernatural supermarket ... Madog
Reply
#20
RE: Help refuting an Intelligent Design Argument
Just remember that the world is flat, is only 6 thousand years old, and that gravity is only a theory and should share the classroom with Intelligent Falling.
Dying to live, living to die.
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Looking for an intelligent, rational discussion re atheism Fred 84 13614 September 6, 2011 at 3:24 am
Last Post: KichigaiNeko



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)