N
Neithan
Guest
What is “non-design”? This is assuming that nature is not designed. It actually denies teleology generally and then tries to find it in some particular.
Do you believe in evolution?
- Thread starter BlueKumul
- Start date
- Status
R
rossum
Guest
You are not reading what I say again. If you cannot read what I actually post then you will continue to make obvious errors.
Jellyfish are filled with fluid. They do not have a heart, the movements of their body slosh the fluid around, which gives them enough of a circulatory system for their purposes. We still use a similar system ourselves, with muscle movements pumping the blood in our veins back towards our heart. A cut in a vein bleeds less than a cut in an artery because the blood is at a lower pressure.
For an intermediate system, study insects and how they move hemolymph (their rough equivalent of blood) round their bodies.
If you do not understand basic biology you will be at a disadvantage in a discussion about evolution.
D
Dan123
Guest
No one ever claimed HGT was a type of mutation, it’s gene transfer, which can spread mutations.
H
Hume
Guest
Huzzah.
I’d argue that Genesis was never meant to be viewed as a scientific textbook. I’m almost as atheist as it gets.
Last edited:
N
Neithan
Guest
It would be bias-exercise if it could be interpreted differently. Try explaining biology without teleonomy, though. It’s entrenched.
B
Bill_B_NY
Guest
You need to appeal to God for the ability, desire and recognition of truth.
From an evolutionary perspective, there is no need for the concept of truth verses falsehood, and no value given to one or the other.
Everything serves only for fitness and survival - not for reasoning and finding the truth of things. That comes from God.
You use the facility of reason, but that facility cannot be the result of blind, mindless processes.
B
Bill_B_NY
Guest
It is meant as a guideline for reality and for human life.
D
Dan123
Guest
You don’t think basing decisions on true things is more likely to lead to desirable outcomes than basing them on false things?
H
Hume
Guest
Teleonomy deals with mechanics.
Bird is in Galapagos. Bird has hard time eating the local food.
Over time, the bird’s children with bigger, harder beaks have an easier time eating the food, resulting in them having more offspring.
Original beak of said bird eventually disappears from local environment as it’s out-competed.
I don’t see the metaphysical appeal, there. Genuinely. that’s because I don’t think it’s there.
B
Bill_B_NY
Guest
Anyone who says that evolution is natural selection acting on mutations would then be wrong.
B
Bill_B_NY
Guest
The lives of the Catholic martyrs show us otherwise.
D
Dan123
Guest
You really need to spell this out because we have a major disconnect in our communication here.
Mutation occurs (mutation), if that creature reproduces(natural selection), which HGT is one way for its genes to be passed on, then that mutation can carry into it’s offspring.
D
Dan123
Guest
Exceptions don’t prove the rule. I doubt you consider the martyr’s of other religions to be compelling evidence of their truthfulness.
N
Neithan
Guest
It’s descriptive teleology without assuming a conscious mind.
Yet our epistemology assumes it, and we haven’t found one that seems to correspond more accurately with reality. So on what basis do you doubt it?
H
Hume
Guest
No I don’t. I need to go to school or read a book so I can learn how to do that.
I didn’t appeal to any deity to learn how to change my sparkplugs. I bought a Hanes manual for the make and model of my car.
Why not?
Last edited:
H
Hume
Guest
The basis that the philosophical default is “uncertainty” and that nothing can take it’s place without sufficient evidence.
B
Bill_B_NY
Guest
With all respect, those gentlemen are entirely incorrect in their understanding of the Bible and of the Christian faith. I do not accept fundamentalist, Protestant teaching on such matters. Yes, St. Thomas’ teaching is of the Truth (although not infallible).
Father Michael Chaberek
Thomas Aquinas on Evolution and Intelligent Design |
aquinas.design
I
IWantGod
Guest
No, that’s not true. In fact a real discussion about teleology never happens in these sorts of debates. The intelligent design movement usually argues that organisms are too complex to be the result of natural processes and therefore requires a builder who directly put the parts of organisms together and produced their kinds. And following in the atheists footsteps they usually argue that if it is a natural process then evolution by definition makes God obsolete as a cause. It’s a very specific ideology and not a very sophisticated one.
B
Bill_B_NY
Guest
It’s a question of origins and the powers you possess as a human being.
Yes, you can merely say “I am rational and I value truth over falsehood and use logical argument to determine such” - you could also say “I’m not interested in knowing how I received these qualities”.
But if you want to understand your own being, then you have to try to discover how a blind, irrational, mindless process can create a value system based on truth and logical constructs.
Try to create one.
Start with random entities moving randomly.
Then see what kind of order and purpose emerge from them.
Failing that, the only reasonable answer is that your very own consciousness and rational mind are the product of non-material, non-evolved intelligence.
- Status