RE: The Watchmaker: my fav argument
February 28, 2021 at 5:23 pm
(This post was last modified: February 28, 2021 at 5:26 pm by Simon Moon.)
First of all, complexity it not the hallmark of design. We detect design by contrasting it with things that naturally occur.
Humans, cells, trees, DNA, etc., etc., are all things that naturally occur.
Second, we know watches, or buildings, or a 747, or a painting, or whatever other non-naturally occurring object a theist wants to stick in their failed analogy, because we have a history of of those things being designed. I can look up plans for buildings, watches, and planes on the Internet. I can talk to aeronautical engineers, architects, and horologists and discuss airplane, building and watch design.
Who can I talk to about cell 'design', or the 'design' of complete organisms?
Humans, cells, trees, DNA, etc., etc., are all things that naturally occur.
Second, we know watches, or buildings, or a 747, or a painting, or whatever other non-naturally occurring object a theist wants to stick in their failed analogy, because we have a history of of those things being designed. I can look up plans for buildings, watches, and planes on the Internet. I can talk to aeronautical engineers, architects, and horologists and discuss airplane, building and watch design.
Who can I talk to about cell 'design', or the 'design' of complete organisms?
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
