RE: The Watchmaker: my fav argument
March 19, 2021 at 1:35 pm
(This post was last modified: March 19, 2021 at 1:46 pm by John 6IX Breezy.)
(March 19, 2021 at 1:03 pm)polymath257 Wrote: If design is to be a reasonable explanation at all, it *has* to give observational differences with naturalism.
You use a lot of ifs throughout your arguments and it becomes hard to tell when you're making a claim about design, or just adding conditional layers to your hypothetical cake (no slight intended I just couldn't think of a different analogy lol). So can you clarify the quote above—do you or do you not think there are observable differences between the two?
And secondly, why is the "reasonableness" of design dependent on a contrast with naturalism? This implies that design is unreasonable if no difference exist. In which case shouldn't both perspectives be equally reasonable or unreasonable?
