Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Alamo-Girl

You may not be able to notice what you have written, but you rather clearly state that ID is under no obligation to identify and characteristics of the designer.

This may explain why, in 200 years, ID hasn’t gotten around to doing any research into the methods, or characteristics of the designer. Of course it poses no reason for science to be concerned, other than the fact that ID is intellectually vacuous and associates itself with people who are genuinely anti-science.


572 posted on 07/02/2007 1:43:08 PM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 568 | View Replies ]


To: js1138; betty boop; hosepipe; unspun
Thank you for your reply!

You may not be able to notice what you have written, but you rather clearly state that ID is under no obligation to identify and characteristics of the designer.

I’m speaking of the Intelligent Design hypothesis. You are speaking of “Intelligent Design” as if is a legal entity, a person or corporation.

The hypothesis refers to an “intelligent cause” not a “designer” – and no, the hypothesis has no obligation to identify whether the “intelligent cause” is a phenomenon or an agent – much less a specific phenomenon or agent.

The hypothesis holds when scientific evidence shows that there exists a direct effect/cause relationship between “certain features” and an “intelligent cause.”

As I have mentioned before, it should be obvious that “certain features” in offspring are the effect of the parents’ choice of mates (an intelligent cause.)

ID is intellectually vacuous…

To the contrary, it challenges the view that life has evolved by a random walk.

Jeepers, it should be only obvious that intelligent creatures choose their mates, good choices directly improving their chances for survival.

The concept of a “random” walk should be dismissed on the merits anyway.

After all, we cannot say something is random in the system when we don’t know – and can’t know – what the system “is.” For instance, a series of numbers extracted from the extension of pi may appear to be random when they are in fact highly determined. And we do not know - nor can we know - the full number and types of dimensions which make up physical reality.

Order cannot rise spontaneously from an unguided physical system. Period.

There are always guides to the system. At the very least, the guides include space, time, physical causation and physical laws.

Self-organizing complexity and cellular automata both require guides to the system.

The intelligent design hypothesis suggests that some of the guides are "intelligent." Again, it simply says that "certain features of life and the universe are best explained by intelligent cause rather than an unguided process such as natural selection."

… [ID] associates itself with people who are genuinely anti-science….

So what?! There are scientists who are anti-God. Should we reject science because some of the scientists offend us?

595 posted on 07/02/2007 7:35:43 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 572 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson