Design

  • Thread starter Thread starter tonyrey
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Does anybody here care to refute Einstein’s view on the apparent existence of a reasoning (read intelligent") designer behind the universe?

“My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble minds. That deeply emotional conviction of the presence of a superior reasoning power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible universe, forms my idea of God.” Albert Einstein
 
Charlemagne_III said:
Does anybody here care to refute Einstein’s view on the apparent existence of a reasoning (read intelligent") designer behind the universe?

“My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble minds. That deeply emotional conviction of the presence of a superior reasoning power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible universe, forms my idea of God.” Albert Einstein
Click to expand...
Universe could be infinite in space therefore everything is possible.
 
rossum said:
In general, science can detect many forms of intelligent design.

The capitalised Intelligent Design, as proposed by the Discovery Institute is currently not among the forms of design that science can detect. The DI has proposed some methods, such as Behe’s Irreducible Complexity and Dembski’s Complex Specified Information, however both of those have failed. IC can be produced by natural processes and CSI has problems with objectively defining the concept of a specification.

So far there has not been any scientifically reliable design detection method from the DI.

rossum
Click to expand...
I think God could make it obvious if He wanted otherwise how He could prove that He is God.
 
rossum said:
In general, science can detect many forms of intelligent design.

The capitalised Intelligent Design, as proposed by the Discovery Institute is currently not among the forms of design that science can detect. The DI has proposed some methods, such as Behe’s Irreducible Complexity and Dembski’s Complex Specified Information, however both of those have failed. IC can be produced by natural processes and CSI has problems with objectively defining the concept of a specification.

So far there has not been any scientifically reliable design detection method from the DI.

rossum
Click to expand...
The best test of any explanation of reality is whether it corresponds to the way we live. Every sane person behaves as if life is purposeful, i.e. designed. Anyone who disagrees needs to justify the hypothesis that purposeful activity is produced by purposeless events.
 
Charlemagne_III said:
For the scientist to logically infer that the universe is not designed, that chance alone rules, he must know that there is no Designer. How does the scientist prove there is no Designer since the scientific method is not even designed to figure that out? He certainly cannot say that he proves it by seeing no instances of design anywhere in the universe. To say that would be to argue that his own experiments are not designed and occur only by chance, a patently absurd conclusion to put it mildly.

As tonyrey so often asks, how does chance create a designer in humans? That is to say, how does chance do that without being designed to do it?
Click to expand...
Purposeless processes are a hopelessly inadequate explanation of the origin and development of rational beings who can understand that purposeless processes are a hopelessly inadequate explanation of the origin and development of rational beings. 🙂
 
STT said:
I have problem with that diagram. Atheists in principal could have faith in truth without any need in revelation.
Click to expand...
An atheist that has faith in truth is not an atheist. 😦 An evolutionary formed brain is not interested in truth.

The point I was driving at was the circles and Godel’s theorem as it relates to the design discussion.
 
buffalo said:
An atheist that has faith in truth is not an atheist. 😦 An evolutionary formed brain is not interested in truth.
Click to expand...
That is not correct. That (the bold part) is an insult. These people are honest with themselves since they accept a bitter belief that death is the end.
buffalo said:
The point I was driving at was the circles and Godel’s theorem as it relates to the design discussion.
Click to expand...
I gave a counter example to show that he is wrong.
 
STT said:
That is not correct. That (the bold part) is an insult. These people are honest with themselves since they accept a bitter belief that death is the end.

I gave a counter example to show that he is wrong.
Click to expand...
An evolutionary formed brain survives by __________________? (fill in blank)
 
buffalo said:
An evolutionary formed brain survives by __________________?
(fill in blank)
Click to expand...
An evolutionary formed brain survives by ambiguity and curiosity. Think of it this way: The universe is intelligent and ambiguity acts against curiosity in order to allow evolution.
 
STT said:
An evolutionary formed brain survives by ambiguity and curiosity. Think of it this way: The universe is intelligent and ambiguity acts against curiosity in order to allow evolution.
Click to expand...
The universe is intelligent through Blind Unguided Chance or by an intelligent agent?
 
STT said:
Do you believe that God cannot really hide His existence? Isn’t that a limitation on God?
Click to expand...
There are several things God cannot do:

He cannot lie
He cannot deceive
He cannot break a promise
He cannot create a square circle

Catholics understand God to be almighty. God is not hidden. Sin cause our blindness to God. He has Revealed Himself to us.
 
buffalo said:
There are several things God cannot do:

He cannot lie
He cannot deceive
He cannot break a promise
He cannot create a square circle

Catholics understand God to be almighty. God is not hidden. Sin cause our blindness to God. He has Revealed Himself to us.
Click to expand...
That applies only to good God. It seems that God is neutral though. Why God should have any preference?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top