Posts: 25314
Threads: 239
Joined: August 26, 2010
Reputation:
156
RE: Detecting design or intent in nature
January 6, 2015 at 11:56 am
No, I deliberately made the distinction between all pools of water and all the ones you'd ever seen. But since you've gone there, how would you go about determining the artificiality of these pools and how would you know when you've examined them all so as to form your conclusion,
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
Posts: 2737
Threads: 51
Joined: March 7, 2014
Reputation:
6
RE: Detecting design or intent in nature
January 6, 2015 at 12:00 pm
(This post was last modified: January 6, 2015 at 12:05 pm by Heywood.)
(January 6, 2015 at 11:56 am)Stimbo Wrote: No, I deliberately made the distinction between all pools of water and all the ones you'd ever seen. But since you've gone there, how would you go about determining the artificiality of these pools and how would you know when you've examined them all so as to form your conclusion,
In order to be absolutely positive of my conclusion I would have to examine every pool of water. However each time I examine a pool of water and find it to be artificial, while never finding one to be natural, it increases the likelyhood of all pools of water being artificial.
I can prove this concept to be true and I am thinking about doing a thread just on this concept.
Posts: 25314
Threads: 239
Joined: August 26, 2010
Reputation:
156
RE: Detecting design or intent in nature
January 6, 2015 at 12:07 pm
And the moment you come across one that isn't artificial?
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
Posts: 2737
Threads: 51
Joined: March 7, 2014
Reputation:
6
RE: Detecting design or intent in nature
January 6, 2015 at 12:10 pm
(January 6, 2015 at 12:07 pm)Stimbo Wrote: And the moment you come across one that isn't artificial?
Then my conclusion changes from "All pools of water are artificial" to "Some pools of water are artificial and some are natural".
Posts: 7045
Threads: 20
Joined: June 17, 2014
Reputation:
55
RE: Detecting design or intent in nature
January 6, 2015 at 12:11 pm
But how can your conclusion be "all pools of water are artificial" if you haven't examined "all pools of water"?
In every country and every age, the priest had been hostile to Liberty.
- Thomas Jefferson
Posts: 66501
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
160
RE: Detecting design or intent in nature
January 6, 2015 at 12:12 pm
(This post was last modified: January 6, 2015 at 12:24 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
Pages and pages ago it was brought to your attention that you do not understand necessity or evolved systems. I see that hasn't changed. Your own examples....are examples of things which do not require intelligence. Computational systems (and the products of computational systems - such as simulations) -do not require intelligence for their existence or efficacy-. You've confused presence with necessity. If I indulge your fantasy, correlation with causation.
You think of computers as "something we create" rather than what they are, principles we -implement-. We're present, when a computer does work. We aren't the reason that it does work. We design the implementation - the architecture..but all of the architecture in the world doesn't mean shit without the principles that underlie it which are in no way indebted to us or any thinking thing for their existence - and the point of the architecture is to make the operation of the machine intelligible to us, to make it do work for us. It will do work regardless. Computers that we -do not make...not even at the architectural level- exist. Similarly, we are present when things evolve. That doesn't mean that our intelligence (or any intelligence) makes them evolve, or is required to create a system in which they can evolve...even if there are intelligent things floating around while they do so.
To put it even more simply. If a god exists..there's still no evidence that it had anything to do with evolution or the universe in which it operates......and there is no requirement for it to have anything to do with either. It can and does happen without interference from any god, any intelligence.
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!
Posts: 2737
Threads: 51
Joined: March 7, 2014
Reputation:
6
RE: Detecting design or intent in nature
January 6, 2015 at 12:23 pm
(January 6, 2015 at 12:12 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Pages and pages ago it was brought to your attention that you do not understand necessity or evolved systems. I see that hasn't changed. Your own examples....are examples of things which do not require intelligence. Computational systems (and the products of computational systems - such as simulations) -do not require intelligence for their existence or efficacy-. You've confused presence with necessity. If I indulge your fantasy, correlation with causation.
You think of computers as "something we create" rather than what they are, principles we -implement-. We're present, when a computer does work. We aren't the reason that it does work. We design the implemenation - the architecture..but all of the architecture in the world doesn't mean shit without the principles that underlie it which are in no way indebted to us or any thinking thing for their existence. Computers that we -do not make- exist. Similarly, we are present when things evolve. That doesn't mean that our intelligence (or any intelligence) makes them evolve, or is required to create a system in which they can evolve.
Your counter argument was merely contradiction and no substance. It reminded me of this:
Posts: 66501
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
160
RE: Detecting design or intent in nature
January 6, 2015 at 12:30 pm
Just point out exactly what you disagree with, and the grounds for your disagreement, and I'll keep trying to help you understand where you went into the deep end of your artifical pool.
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!
Posts: 2737
Threads: 51
Joined: March 7, 2014
Reputation:
6
RE: Detecting design or intent in nature
January 6, 2015 at 12:33 pm
(January 6, 2015 at 12:11 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote: But how can your conclusion be "all pools of water are artificial" if you haven't examined "all pools of water"?
How do you know the speed of light in a vacuum is constant if you haven't measured the speed of every photon travelling through a vacuum?
For AlexK and Surge: Maxwell's equations don't tell you because then the question becomes how do you know the permeability and permittivity of free space are constants if you haven't measured those values for every point in space?
Posts: 66501
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
160
RE: Detecting design or intent in nature
January 6, 2015 at 12:34 pm
(This post was last modified: January 6, 2015 at 12:35 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
Here, I'll start you off Heywood.
Do you think that our intelligence created
-computation
or
-a system with which to implement computation, that would be intelligible to us as users of that system?
(is the difference clear to you or do you require elaboration?)
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!
|
