Small post Clarifying a common fallacy here.

[DD_8630]

No.

Did you not read what I put or were you building a stawman?

Or is it some kind of misunderstanding? Or something else?

Anyway, I mean - by complexity -specifically something that is implausible - but something that is unlikely to come about by chance. As I have already said.

Which is exactly what I said...

The more unlikely to come about by chance the more improbable. Not just implausible for any reason - or 'intuitively' implausible. The loose "oh I can't see how that's possible or very likely" kind of thing. I'm talking about how it would very very very improbable for an eye to just 'jump' into existence. It takes very very long periods of evolution. One mutation on an animal without eyes wouldn't make a fully formed functioning eye of an animal like a bird, or a human. But very small changes over long periods isn't so improbable.

Eyes are very complex things because it is very very improbable indeed for them to come about by chance alone.

Which is almost exactly what I wrote, word for word.

That's the kind of complexity I'm talking about. Things don't just 'happen'. And aren't 'just there'. Complex things certainly aren't! God would have to be much more complex than the universe because we're postulating another entity (a diety) that comes before the universe and had to know how to and be capable of creating it.

If from the beginning the universe is very simple indeed. God would almost certainly have to be more complex because he would have to be there before it, right from the beginning (or create himself out of nothing!) and make if all out of thin air - or out of himself - and no exactly how to do it. And he's just an extra edition.

If you could say God was there all along to create the universe. It would be far simpler to just say the universe was. God would have to be more complex because if the universe is ULTIMATELY simple when its created by God - he would have to be at least just a bit more complex to be capable of creating it. He's an unnecessary complex edition.

And thus far, its not how the universe works. All 'creators' are evolved beings like ourselves, thus far. No evidence otherwise so far.

And I have explained my definition of complexity. And why I think God would have to be more complex than the universe if he existed.

EvF

Well, yes, in that definition. But generally complexity refers to the entity itself, not its plausibility. The eye is called because it has highly structured and identifiable parts with high specified and identifiable functions: the lens, the muscles, the nerves, the blood supply, etc, all have specific roles to play.

A 'simpler' eye, then, would be one that performs the same overall role with fewer and more elegant parts. An hourglass is a simpler time-keeping device than a digital watch, since it performs the same function with far fewer and less intricate parts.