RE: Detecting design or intent in nature
February 6, 2015 at 2:53 pm
(This post was last modified: February 6, 2015 at 2:54 pm by Chas.)
(February 6, 2015 at 2:45 pm)Heywood Wrote:(February 6, 2015 at 2:31 pm)Simon Moon Wrote: Your set does not go far enough to include all the things that define biological evolution.
A motorcycle can be defined as the following: a two-wheeled vehicle that is powered by a motor and has no pedals.
According to that set of things that define a motorcycle, a Segway would be included. Is a Segway a motorcycle?
There exist a set...two-wheeled vehicles that are powered by a motor and have no pedals.
A motorcycle is not a Segway, but both are members of the set, two-wheeled vehicles that are powered by a motor and have no pedals.
Now if I make a point about the set, say....every element contains two wheels made of rubber, you don't refute the point about the set by claiming a motorcycle is not a Segway. You refute the point by providing an example of a two wheeled vehicle powered by a motor that does not have wheels made of rubber.
But if you prove something only using Segways it says nothing about proving it for motorcycles, and vice versa.
They are disjoint subsets of your set.
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Science is not a subject, but a method.