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

To: Right Wing Professor
One major premise of ID is that design can be detected by scientific principles. You're arguing against ID by saying the designer's purpose is ineffable.

The incompleteness of a theory does not necessarily equal forfeiture or even the unwarrantedness of its scientific status. For analagous example, even though I might lack exhaustive knowledge of the ultimate purpose of the designer and sculptor of Mount Rushmore, that subjective inscrutablity does not preclude the immediate defeasible inference that the work was the product of intelligence, as opposed to wind erosion.

Cordially,

1,050 posted on 02/27/2003 11:27:26 AM PST by Diamond
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 804 | View Replies ]


To: Diamond

dmd ...

Mount Rushmore, that subjective inscrutablity does not preclude the immediate defeasible inference that the work was the product of intelligence, as opposed to wind erosion.

Cordially,


1050 posted on 02/27/2003 11:27 AM PST by Diamond
1,053 posted on 02/27/2003 11:41:48 AM PST by f.Christian (( + God *IS* Truth + love courage // LIBERTY *logic* *SANITY*Awakening + ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1050 | View Replies ]

To: Diamond
For analagous example, even though I might lack exhaustive knowledge of the ultimate purpose of the designer and sculptor of Mount Rushmore, that subjective inscrutablity does not preclude the immediate defeasible inference that the work was the product of intelligence, as opposed to wind erosion.

Ah. But can you do that for any arbitrary case?

There was another poster not too many months ago, who posited much the same thing as you do here, but he turned out to be unwilling to play the "design inference game" - would you like to play? It's very simple - I'll post pictures of various objects and artifacts, one at a time, and for each one, you infer whether or not it was designed (or, "the product of intelligence", if you like), and then defend that inference as best you can.

Ready to play? ;)

1,063 posted on 02/27/2003 12:47:19 PM PST by general_re (Friends help you move. Real friends help you move bodies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1050 | View Replies ]

To: Diamond
For analagous example, even though I might lack exhaustive knowledge of the ultimate purpose of the designer and sculptor of Mount Rushmore, that subjective inscrutablity does not preclude the immediate defeasible inference that the work was the product of intelligence, as opposed to wind erosion.

There's no way someone would mistake something designed for something fortuitous.

   

1,113 posted on 02/28/2003 6:05:01 AM PST by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1050 | 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