(February 27, 2009 at 9:05 am)Ephrium Wrote: A Claim was posted. That the creator MUST be at least as complex.
My post then challenged it. I do not agree with the claim.
We are not disputing the fact that you do not agree, but you claim it is a fallacy, I don't agree with that claim.
(February 27, 2009 at 9:05 am)Ephrium Wrote: It is evident to me that it is certainly possible that one day, humans will be able to create a robot, faster and better and more intelligent than he is.
That is not evidence, that is an assertion. One that is not backup up by evidence.
(February 27, 2009 at 9:05 am)Ephrium Wrote: Given that according to atheism, at its core, humans are no more than an arrangement of molecules.
The part "According to Atheism" I certainly do not agree with. All Atheism is a disbelief in gods. No more, no less. Whatever an Atheist does believe is up to the individual Atheist itself. Some Atheist believe in the duality of the mind, some believe in re-incarnation, some believe that aliens landed on this planet billions of years ago and injected life into the biosphere. There is no doctrine involved in Atheism.
Let us try it simplified this time.
You claim that "A creator must be more complex than it's creation" is a fallacy. Supply us with the evidence that that is a fallacy.
Best regards,
Leo van Miert
Horsepower is how hard you hit the wall --Torque is how far you take the wall with you
Leo van Miert
Horsepower is how hard you hit the wall --Torque is how far you take the wall with you
