28 Sep 22
"The watchmaker argument is a teleological argument which states, by way of an analogy, that a design implies a designer, especially intelligent design by an intelligent designer, i.e. a creator deity." [wiki]
Is this the STRONGEST argument that theists have for the existence of a creator entity?
If not, what is?
@fmf saidIf not, what is?
"The watchmaker argument is a teleological argument which states, by way of an analogy, that a design implies a designer, especially intelligent design by an intelligent designer, i.e. a creator deity." [wiki]
Is this the STRONGEST argument that theists have for the existence of a creator entity?
If not, what is?
IMHO there is no such thing as a "strongest argument" for or against a creator deity. One of the things that makes us individuals is the fact that our minds are all wired a little differently. What may be a strong argument to one person may not be so for another. As a teacher of mine once said: "There are many paths to the top of a mountain"
28 Sep 22
@mchill saidSo, as an individual, wired as you are, what is - for you - the strongest argument for the existence of a creator entity?
One of the things that makes us individuals is the fact that our minds are all wired a little differently. What may be a strong argument to one person may not be so for another.
@fmf saidThe strongest argument I found is the moon. i.e., what are the mathematical odds of a planet's moon being located so it is appears to be exactly the same size as the sun, which is much further away during an eclipse, and at the same time being just the right size to create predictable tides that are not so radical as to be destructive, and at the same time having a magnetic field just strong enough to shield Earth from the effects of the Sun’s destructive radiation and at the same time, orbiting earth in such a way that its axis and climate remains relatively stable? The odds of all these variables being the result of random chance are remote indeed.
So, as an individual, wired as you are, what is - for you - the strongest argument for the existence of a creator entity?
@mchill saidIs this not a variant of the watchmaker argument?
The strongest argument I found is the moon. i.e., what are the mathematical odds of a planet's moon being located so it is appears to be exactly the same size as the sun, which is much further away during an eclipse, and at the same time being just the right size to create predictable tides that are not so radical as to be destructive, and at the same time having a magnetic fi ...[text shortened]... atively stable? The odds of all these variables being the result of random chance are remote indeed.
30 Sep 22
@mchill saidI once read an article which stated that once (a few million years ago) tides were much more extreme than they are now, like a couple of hundred metres. (Sorry I'm vague on the details, it's a long time since I read the article. ) I suppose one could argue that if a creator entity parked the moon in a perfect place, why have tides at all? I can't make any of this any more than a big, happy accident, and it certainly doesn't 'prove' anything. Why make the suns' radiation destructive? If said creator entity was trying to make a 'perfect earth' for us to live on, he/she/it missed by quite a long way. Why not give us fur, so we could live happily at the poles without freezing our whatsits off? It's all just nature; nature, nature, nature, and lucky old us.
The strongest argument I found is the moon. i.e., what are the mathematical odds of a planet's moon being located so it is appears to be exactly the same size as the sun, which is much further away during an eclipse, and at the same time being just the right size to create predictable tides that are not so radical as to be destructive, and at the same time having a magnetic fi ...[text shortened]... atively stable? The odds of all these variables being the result of random chance are remote indeed.
30 Sep 22
@mchill saidIt's interesting that the moon and its 200 counterparts orbiting the other seven planets are all uninhabitable. What are the odds of that being the case in a deliberately created solar system?
The strongest argument I found is the moon... The odds of all these variables being the result of random chance are remote indeed.
01 Oct 22
@fmf saidYou see things from your perspective, and I see things from mine.
It's interesting that the moon and its 200 counterparts orbiting the other seven planets are all uninhabitable. What are the odds of that being the case in a deliberately created solar system?
01 Oct 22
@mchill saidGreat. I examined your perspective - which I totally get - I even suggested it is a variant of the watchmaker argument - which I think is perhaps the strongest evidence of a creator entity - but when I ask a question - about "the odds" you mentioned - you cop out with an evasive little retort.
You see things from your perspective, and I see things from mine.
What light does my "what are the odds?" question shed upon the resonance of your "what are the odds?" question?
02 Oct 22
1 edit
@fmf saidWhat light does my "what are the odds?" question shed upon the resonance of your "what are the odds?" question?
Great. I examined your perspective - which I totally get - I even suggested it is a variant of the watchmaker argument - which I think is perhaps the strongest evidence of a creator entity - but when I ask a question - about "the odds" you mentioned - you cop out with an evasive little retort.
What light does my "what are the odds?" question shed upon the resonance of your "what are the odds?" question?
Very little, since we're getting into another meaningless abstract hypothetical commonly known as "mental masturbation" 🙄