RE: The Problem with Christians
March 6, 2016 at 12:17 pm
(This post was last modified: March 6, 2016 at 12:21 pm by Angrboda.)
(March 6, 2016 at 2:03 am)AJW333 Wrote:(March 5, 2016 at 11:34 am)Jörmungandr Wrote: There is no such natural law. Now you're just making up question begging material.Definition of natural law;
"an observable law relating to natural phenomena."
"All life comes from life" qualifies as natural law because this is the only way life occurs, unless you can give an example of non-life producing life.
Quote:A scientific law is a statement based on repeated experimental observations that describes some aspects of the universe. A scientific law always applies under the same conditions, and implies that there is a causal relationship involving its elements. Factual and well-confirmed statements like "Mercury is liquid at standard temperature and pressure" are considered too specific to qualify as scientific laws. A central problem in the philosophy of science, going back to David Hume, is that of distinguishing causal relationships (such as those implied by laws) from principles that arise due to constant conjunction.
Wikipedia | Scientific law
You are confusing a constant conjunction for a principle that denotes a causal relationship. If there is some reason life comes only from life, you might have a candidate for a natural law, but as yet you have nothing but their constant conjunction. If life did arise from non-life, then the conjunction isn't even constant. But you are declaring that the conjunction is constant, so you are declaring that life never came from non-life, and that is begging the question. Whether life ever arises from non-life is an empirical question which we simply have not answered yet. An indeterminate correlation is not a law.
"unless you can give an example of non-life producing life."
Whether I can give such an example is a moot point, as what is necessary to disprove the principle is not that any one person can give a counter-example, but that one is in principle possible. You keep stumbling over this point, which leads me to believe you don't understand the philosophy behind science much at all, or, that you are being purposely thick.
![[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]](https://i.postimg.cc/zf86M5L7/extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg)