13 Mar 07
Originally posted by DoctorScribbleswhy ask a question that you know the answer to? and what does one food prove? why arent ALL foods conveniently made for humans? it was a coincidence but that does not mean God does not exist. a banna; atheist's nightmare? these type of theists embarrass theists like me
I had a feeling it wasn't.
13 Mar 07
I believe that any argument for "Intelligent Design" based on the premise that:
1. The universe shows signs of intelligent design.
2. The design is specifically for the benefit of humans.
falls over immediately as it is immediately apparent to the majority of humans of even average intelligence that even we with our meager intelligence can see some obvious design flaws as well as suggest some design improvements.
13 Mar 07
Originally posted by twhiteheadI don't think all ID-ers will hold (2) necessary.
I believe that any argument for "Intelligent Design" based on the premise that:
1. The universe shows signs of intelligent design.
2. The design is specifically for the benefit of humans.
falls over immediately as it is immediately apparent to the majority of humans of even average intelligence that even we with our meager intelligence can see some obvious design flaws as well as suggest some design improvements.
Also, even if we can genuinely suggest "design improvements" (a claim that is often more bark than bite), that doesn't refute Intelligent Design per se -- at best it shows that we are better designers.
13 Mar 07
Originally posted by lucifershammerOf course even those who do accept 2. try to use the argument that we can't possibly know what is "best" for us. Of course such a stance invalidates any claim that 2. is evident.
I don't think all ID-ers will hold (2) necessary.
Also, even if we can genuinely suggest "design improvements" (a claim that is often more bark than bite), that doesn't refute Intelligent Design per se -- at best it shows that we are better designers.
13 Mar 07
Originally posted by lucifershammerHow could an IDer hold the belief that humans are better designers than God?
Also, even if we can genuinely suggest "design improvements" (a claim that is often more bark than bite), that doesn't refute Intelligent Design per se -- at best it shows that we are better designers.
13 Mar 07
Originally posted by XanthosNZIn itself, ID theory does not posit an all-knowing, all-powerful, morally perfect personal being (i.e. God) as the Designer. Belief in those qualities would have to come from elsewhere.
How could an IDer hold the belief that humans are better designers than God?
You're right in that IDers who believe the Designer is God would not believe that humans are "better" designers. I suppose the counter-argument to twh's argument that we can come up with design improvements would be that, in reality, we simply can't. Either the "new designs" would be impossible in reality, or would cause more harm than good.
13 Mar 07
Originally posted by lucifershammerI want X-ray vision.
In itself, ID theory does not posit an all-knowing, all-powerful, morally perfect personal being (i.e. God) as the Designer. Belief in those qualities would have to come from elsewhere.
You're right in that IDers who believe the Designer is God would not believe that humans are "better" designers. I suppose the counter-argument to twh's argument th ...[text shortened]... her the "new designs" would be impossible in reality, or would cause more harm than good.