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: March 29, 2024, 4:12 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Argument against Intelligent Design
#11
RE: Argument against Intelligent Design
Evolution is not caused by a super cognition. It is simply an outcome of a process.

I find it absurd to claim a super cognition is the cause knowing our planet is 4 billion years old, and has had 5 mass extinction events, and that humans in our current form have only been around 200,000 years. Not to mention life like bacteria and cockroaches outnumber humans, reproduce at a far faster rate than humans and have existed far longer than humans.
Reply
#12
RE: Argument against Intelligent Design
(May 7, 2019 at 11:08 am)Brian37 Wrote: Evolution is not caused by a super cognition. It is simply an outcome of a process.

I find it absurd to claim a super cognition is the cause knowing our planet is 4 billion years old, and has had 5 mass extinction events, and that humans in our current form have only been around 200,000 years. Not to mention life like bacteria and cockroaches outnumber humans, reproduce at a far faster rate than humans and have existed far longer than humans.

I agree--I'm just involved in a debate with a dishonest intelligent design proponent and wanted some feedback on my rebuttal. Thanks for responding.
Reply
#13
RE: Argument against Intelligent Design
The key assumption in all these design arguments is that human design and intelligence is not itself the result of natural causes, i.e. a deterministic brain. If you analogize anything to human mental ability, and human mental ability is a natural phenomena, then by analogy, the creator that you analogize is responsible for biological design is also a natural phenomena. God is not a natural, mechanistic phenomena and so, if mind is mechanistic, the cause of biological design is not God.

The fact of the matter is that we don't know whether human mind is a natural, mechanistic phenomena or not. So the best that this design argument can conclude is that biological design may or may not be the result of a natural, mechanistic process. And so the argument accomplishes nothing, as we knew this to be the case going in.

But your focus on the meaning and validity of the concept of specified complexity has its own utility.
[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]
Reply
#14
RE: Argument against Intelligent Design
(May 7, 2019 at 2:05 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: The key assumption in all these design arguments is that human design and intelligence is not itself the result of natural causes, i.e. a deterministic brain.  If you analogize anything to human mental ability, and human mental ability is a natural phenomena, then by analogy, the creator that you analogize is responsible for biological design is also a natural phenomena.  God is not a natural, mechanistic phenomena and so, if mind is mechanistic, the cause of biological design is not God.

The fact of the matter is that we don't know whether human mind is a natural, mechanistic phenomena or not.  So the best that this design argument can conclude is that biological design may or may not be the result of a natural, mechanistic process.  And so the argument accomplishes nothing, as we knew this to be the case going in.

But your focus on the meaning and validity of the concept of specified complexity has its own utility.

Thanks for the feedback--you make great points. Best, john
Reply
#15
RE: Argument against Intelligent Design
Quote:1. Intelligence is known to cause effects exhibiting information rich and specified complexity 2. The universe and life are effects that exhibit information rich and specified complexity.
3. Therefore, intelligence is a possible cause for the universe and life.

The so called "W.L. Craig fallacy": He is applying everyday intuition and common sense to an environment where it is almost certianly not applicable.

The best explanation/model we currently have for the origin of the universe we live in is, that it once was condensed in a singularity, where, according to most recent calculations the fabric of spacetime breaks down. How can "intelligence" exist, particularly without time? Intellect involves thinking, thinking involves time. How does that work without time?

What is "specified complexity"? No IDer has ever explained it without question begging afaik.



Quote:The only way a possible intelligent cause for the universe and life can be challenged at all is if there could be found a non- intelligent source that can be demonstrated to cause effects of that kind/class
He is trying to establish that ID is the "default position" for the estimated origin of the universe. It is not.
Did you already allow him to shift the burden of proof yet? If so, it was a tactical mistake on your side. You have to demonstrate shit. If he claims ID, he has to support it, thats how the game works.

Quote:Since there are no known non-intelligent sources that can demonstrate causing effects of that kind/class (even a simple cave wall drawing), intelligence stands alone as the highest probable cause for the origin of the universe and life.
Shifting of burden of proof. Bare assertion.
How did he estimate this probability?


Quote:the only known cause for effects of that kind/class are intelligent causes. Period.
black swan fallacy
Cetero censeo religionem delendam esse
Reply
#16
RE: Argument against Intelligent Design
(May 7, 2019 at 2:33 pm)Deesse23 Wrote:
Quote:1. Intelligence is known to cause effects exhibiting information rich and specified complexity 2. The universe and life are effects that exhibit information rich and specified complexity.
3. Therefore, intelligence is a possible cause for the universe and life.

The so called "W.L. Craig fallacy": He is applying everyday intuition and common sense to an environment where it is almost certianly not applicable.

The best explanation/model we currently have for the origin of the universe we live in is, that it once was condensed in a singularity, where, according to most recent calculations the fabric of spacetime breaks down. How can "intelligence" exist, particularly without time? Intellect involves thinking, thinking involves time. How does that work without time?

What is "specified complexity"? No IDer has ever explained it without question begging afaik.

Thanks for the great feedback. I have not answered that particular statement of his--but have answered his other circular reasoning/argument from ignorance/argument by analogy fallacies, etc. I did demand he thoroughly define "specified complexity" and give evidence for his "intelligent agent" and warned him that if he used the Dembski specified complexity model I would immediately end the converstaion because it's been refuted and classified as fraudulent and pseudoscience non-sense. 

Quote:The only way a possible intelligent cause for the universe and life can be challenged at all is if there could be found a non- intelligent source that can be demonstrated to cause effects of that kind/class
He is trying to establish that ID is the "default position" for the estimated origin of the universe. It is not.
Did you already allow him to shift the burden of proof yet? If so, it was a tactical mistake on your side. You have to demonstrate shit. If he claims ID, he has to support it, thats how the game works.

Quote:Since there are no known non-intelligent sources that can demonstrate causing effects of that kind/class (even a simple cave wall drawing), intelligence stands alone as the highest probable cause for the origin of the universe and life.
Shifting of burden of proof. Bare assertion.
How did he estimate this probability?


Quote:the only known cause for effects of that kind/class are intelligent causes. Period.
black swan fallacy
Reply
#17
RE: Argument against Intelligent Design
(May 6, 2019 at 7:48 pm)Jrouche Wrote: Hi Guys, I posted this in another section and a member suggested I post it here.


Just give in, then, genuflect and ask permission to kiss the ring.
Atheist Credo: An universe by chance that also just happened to admit the observer by chance.
Reply
#18
RE: Argument against Intelligent Design
(May 7, 2019 at 10:52 pm)snowtracks Wrote:
(May 6, 2019 at 7:48 pm)Jrouche Wrote: Hi Guys, I posted this in another section and a member suggested I post it here.


Just give in, then, genuflect and ask permission to kiss the ring.
Or he could sit back and laugh at your silly signature

Quote:Atheist Credo:

No such thing 

Quote:An universe by chance which also just happened to admit the observer by chance.
Straw man mixed with argument from incredulity

Quote:1) Intelligence is known to cause effects exhibiting information rich and specified complexity.
2) The universe and life are effects that exhibit information rich and specified complexity.
3) Therefore, intelligence is a possible cause for the universe.
1. Just because it's known to do X does not mean it's the only thing that does X
2.Follows from my first point 
3. Possible isn't good enough and it's worst as no intelligence we know of has ever simulated the kind of complexity found in life 

Oh and Complexity is actually an argument for atheism 
https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/13976
Seek strength, not to be greater than my brother, but to fight my greatest enemy -- myself.

Inuit Proverb

Reply
#19
RE: Argument against Intelligent Design
To blunt any I. E. opposition, you might just ask them what is the most reasonable explanation between the following 2 choices:
1. A fully functioning brain developed through a series of complex steps without any prior thinking commencing at the beginning from elementary elements coalescing which eventually resulted in the first thought*, or
2. Mind existing before the development of the brain.

*Must have the greatest event in the universe’s history and even before. First thought: that would be most ginormously interesting.
Atheist Credo: An universe by chance that also just happened to admit the observer by chance.
Reply
#20
RE: Argument against Intelligent Design
(May 9, 2019 at 1:00 am)snowtracks Wrote: To blunt any I. E. opposition, you might just ask them what is the most reasonable explanation between the following 2 choices:
1. A fully functioning brain developed through a series of complex steps without any prior thinking commencing at the beginning from elementary elements coalescing which eventually resulted in the first thought*, or
2. Mind existing before the development of the brain.

*Must have the greatest event in the universe’s history and even before. First thought: that would be most ginormously interesting.
So a bunch credulity and backwards thinking is your argument ......Sad
Seek strength, not to be greater than my brother, but to fight my greatest enemy -- myself.

Inuit Proverb

Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  [Serious] An Argument Against Hedonistic Moral Realism SenseMaker007 25 2867 June 19, 2019 at 7:21 am
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  An omniscient god cannot be intelligent I_am_not_mafia 20 1527 August 27, 2018 at 9:30 am
Last Post: robvalue
  The Argument Against God's Existence From God's Imperfect Choice Edwardo Piet 53 7908 June 4, 2018 at 2:06 pm
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  The Objective Moral Values Argument AGAINST The Existence Of God Edwardo Piet 58 13613 May 2, 2018 at 2:06 pm
Last Post: Amarok
  The argument against "evil", theists please come to the defense. Mystic 158 67826 December 29, 2017 at 7:21 pm
Last Post: Minimalist
  2 Birds, 1 Stone: An argument against free will and Aquinas' First Way Mudhammam 1 1147 February 20, 2016 at 8:02 am
Last Post: ignoramus
  Detecting design or intent in nature watchamadoodle 1100 178232 February 21, 2015 at 3:23 am
Last Post: bennyboy
  An argument against God Mystic 37 8690 October 20, 2014 at 3:31 pm
Last Post: TreeSapNest
  Using the arguments against actual infinites against theists Freedom of thought 4 2236 May 14, 2014 at 12:58 am
Last Post: Freedom of thought
  On the appearance of Design Angrboda 7 1778 March 16, 2014 at 4:04 am
Last Post: xr34p3rx



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)