Powerful evidence for Design?

[tonyrey]

An overlay which corresponds to reality

                                             *My position is as follows: The universe appears to be essentially  inseparable whereby everything interpenetrates everything else. As odd  as it may seem, it appears that all divisions and boundaries are simply  matters of our thought's construction. Bewildering and as  counterintuitive as it sounds, nothing appears separate from anything  else in the quantum world. Moreover, the same seems to apply in our  everyday macro world. If we proceed from this underlying assumption of  the emerging sciences, then the word connection loses its basis. If  there's no separation, there's no need for connection. The way that we  utilize language very much informs our reality. Therefore, I resist  using the word connection since it misinforms me.

Although the notion of a mind-body connection is a far cry from traditional medicine, which views the mind and body in a dualistic dichotomy, it doesn’t go quite far enough. Mind and body appear to be simply differing aspects of the same whole. As the head and tail of a coin are not separate, but differential points of the same coin, mind and body are thoroughly entwined and inseparable. Where one leaves off and the other starts is a consideration rooted in the outdated belief of cause and effect.

If we could only see our fingers in their separation and had no vision of the hand that grounds the fingers, we might be speaking of the connection between our fingers, not understanding that they are all part of the same hand, no less the same body.*
There is an element of truth in the view that our categories separate that which is inseparable yet it is going to the other extreme to believe cause and effect are illusions. If that were true we wouldn’t be responsible for any of our thoughts or actions nor would scientific explanations correspond to reality!

May God bless you too. We agree on that…

[/QUOTE]

 

[tonyrey]

Unfortunately not everyone shares that view - as we can see from the gross injustice and needless misery in human society.

I agree. The question is where he derives his values in a valueless world…

 

[tonyrey]

So much is obvious, I am asking why you introduced suicide in the first place…

You have already reported me for making a true statement which you have misinterpreted as a personal attack. Let us leave the moderators to make their decision - taking into account these remarks:

**inocente **You must be very disappointed that your thoughts are not continuously beamed around the world on CNN and that philosophers don’t fall prostate at your feet.

Have you thought of formally writing down your ideas as a thesis complete with supporting reasoning? This may lead you to realize that a theory which tries to say everything is a theory which says nothing.

 

[inocente]

So much is obvious, I am asking why you introduced suicide in the first place and what it has with Design™.
tonyrey;9129912:

You have already reported me for making a true statement which you have misinterpreted as a personal attack. Let us leave the moderators to make their decision

What’s that got to do with my question?

I’ve not reported you, I said I would from now on when you break CAF rules by questioning the sincerity of my beliefs. You did get reported a while back but the mod wouldn’t have needed to take any action because I gave you a way out after you panicked (here) and you agreed I’m a Christian (here). Incidentally your use of Spanish made it a snip to find those posts.

I’m very disappointed in you and unless you want to apologize for your behavior (PM is fine) there’s no point in talking to you anymore. Anyway, it seems unlikely anyone will take much notice of who you say isn’t a Christian after some of the ideas expressed on this thread - physician heal thyself and so on.

• taking into account these remarks:

It was a genuine question and suggestion – “Have you thought of formally writing down your ideas as a thesis complete with supporting reasoning? This may lead you to realize that a theory which tries to say everything is a theory which says nothing.”

Your Design™ theory has come across to me as confused, basically as if it’s a previously unexamined set of personal beliefs. Putting some structure into it would be a start to making it consistent.

 

[Ben_Quincy]

Please discuss the topic and not each other.

Thank you.

 

[tonyrey]

Please discuss the topic and not each other.

Thank you.

Thank you for guiding the discussion, Ben.

My statement “The question is where he derives his values in a valueless world” referred to “the typical secularist” mentioned in the other person’s post.

 

[Micorhizea]

Micorhizea;9129629:

There is an element of truth in the view that our categories separate that which is inseparable yet it is going to the other extreme to believe cause and effect are illusions. If that were true we wouldn’t be responsible for any of our thoughts or actions nor would scientific explanations correspond to reality!

May God bless you too. We agree on that…

We need to remember here what level of interpretation we are at here, as they don’t readily mix, “Cause and effect” is an interpretive idea pertinent to our questionable perspective of experiencing things as timed.

And scientific explanations don’t in any case “correspond to reality,” they are a very limited and changing model, however useful or not, of relationships and dynamics within the narrow band of human sense interactions and their mechanical enhancements. At one time “phlogiston” was the prevailing accepted explanation for combustion. Now we know better. In the future, we will know better more, We will never scientifically “know” reality, however much we might appear to know about parts of it.

 

[Micorhizea]

I agree. The question is where he derives his values in a valueless world…

Can you re-state that so it isn’t a self contradictory statement? Thanks

 

[rossum]

My statement “The question is where he derives his values in a valueless world” referred to “the typical secularist” mentioned in the other person’s post.

The world is not valueless. If any person anywhere has values, then those values exist and hence the world is not valueless. If the world were valueless, then there could be no values anywhere.

You might also want to think about what an emergent property derives from. Does the wetness of water (the emergent property) derive from the oxygen (a gas) or the hydrogen (another gas)? An emergent property may not be present in any of its precursors.

rossum

 

[tonyrey]

There are many people who don’t believe in Design yet believe life is purposeful and valuable. This goes to show the belief that life is purposeful is unavoidable in practice. It is impossible to live without any purposes at all. They may be arbitrary but they are purposes nevertheless - which are thought to exist within a purposeless system! One defence of this incoherent view is that values and purposes are subjective: nothing is intrinsically valuable or purposeful but values and purposes can be imposed on anything.

The difficulty with this explanation is that persons would be classified as things! Otherwise the subjective interpretation of morality breaks down. The right to life becomes a matter of opinion - in blatant contradiction of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The criminal’s view becomes as valid as that of the law-abiding citizen unless there is an objective reason for regarding life as intrinsically valuable. So the question remains as to the nature of that reason.

As a general rule value cannot be disassociated from purpose. We can attach value to useless** things** but we cannot reasonably regard persons as valueless. It is a crime to treat people as if they don’t deserve to live. The question of what we deserve doesn’t even arise. Our life is valuable regardless of the way we live - although the value of the consequences of being alive differs greatly from one person to another. So why is life intrinsically valuable?

The answer is that it is a source of opportunities for development, enjoyment and fulfilment. But does it cease to be valuable when there seem to be no more opportunities? If life ends at death there is no obvious reason why a person’s life shouldn’t be terminated when others decide it is no longer valuable. In other words eugenics and euthanasia are justified.

This is the outcome with which secularists are faced. Without Design there is no bulwark against the rejection of an individual’s right to life. If people think we don’t exist for any purpose we are at the mercy of those who may decide our life is no longer valuable. It may not always be evident even to ourselves what our value or purpose is but that doesn’t mean we have none. There is no logical stopping place on the descent from universalism - humanism - egoism - nihilism. Either everything has some ultimate value or nothing has any value whatsoever…

 

[grannymh]

There are many people who don’t believe in Design yet believe life is purposeful and valuable. This goes to show the belief that life is purposeful is unavoidable in practice. It is impossible to live without any purposes at all. They may be arbitrary but they are purposes nevertheless - which are thought to exist within a purposeless system! One defence of this incoherent view is that values and purposes are subjective: nothing is intrinsically valuable or purposeful but values and purposes can be imposed on anything.

The difficulty with this explanation is that persons would be classified as things! Otherwise the subjective interpretation of morality breaks down. The right to life becomes a matter of opinion - in blatant contradiction of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The criminal’s view becomes as valid as that of the law-abiding citizen unless there is an objective reason for regarding life as intrinsically valuable. So the question remains as to the nature of that reason.

As a general rule value cannot be disassociated from purpose. We can attach value to useless** things** but we cannot reasonably regard persons as valueless. It is a crime to treat people as if they don’t deserve to live. The question of what we deserve doesn’t even arise. Our life is valuable regardless of the way we live - although the value of the consequences of being alive differs greatly from one person to another. So why is life intrinsically valuable?

The answer is that it is a source of opportunities for development, enjoyment and fulfilment. But does it cease to be valuable when there seem to be no more opportunities? If life ends at death there is no obvious reason why a person’s life shouldn’t be terminated when others decide it is no longer valuable. In other words eugenics and euthanasia are justified.

This is the outcome with which secularists are faced. Without Design there is no bulwark against the rejection of an individual’s right to life. If people think we don’t exist for any purpose we are at the mercy of those who may decide our life is no longer valuable. It may not always be evident even to ourselves what our value or purpose is but that doesn’t mean we have none. There is no logical stopping place on the descent from universalism - humanism - egoism - nihilism. Either everything has some ultimate value or nothing has any value whatsoever…

The human person is worthy of profound respect is an objective truth. Unfortunately, saying that the human person is designed and has purpose is not enough to support the fact that the human person is worthy of profound respect.

 

[tonyrey]

The human person is worthy of profound respect is an objective truth. Unfortunately, saying that the human person is designed and has purpose is not enough to support the fact that the human person is worthy of profound respect.

Unfortunately it is not an objective truth recognised by everyone, as we can see from the atrocities committed by human beings throughout history and throughout the world - and at this very moment in Syria and elsewhere. That is why an appeal to conscience is not enough to convince everyone that life is worthy of profound respect. Jesus Himself used the argument from Design as evidence that there is a loving Father who cares for all His creatures…

 

[tonyrey]

The world is not valueless. If any person anywhere has values, then those values exist and hence the world is not valueless. If the world were valueless, then there could be no values anywhere.

 

[tonyrey]

*There is an element of truth in the view that our categories separate that which is inseparable yet it is going to the other extreme to believe cause and effect are illusions. If that were true we wouldn’t be responsible for any of our thoughts or actions nor would scientific explanations correspond to reality!
*

Moral responsibility is not affected by the time factor. If we do not cause our actions we cannot be innocent or guilty of anything we do.

And scientific explanations don’t in any case “correspond to reality,” they are a very limited and changing model, however useful or not, of relationships and dynamics within the narrow band of human sense interactions and their mechanical enhancements. At one time “phlogiston” was the prevailing accepted explanation for combustion. Now we know better. In the future, we will know better more, We will never scientifically “know” reality, however much we might appear to know about parts of it.

I agree that scientific explanations are limited but they would not have been so successful if they didn’t correspond to reality to a considerable extent. We are surrounded by its remarkable achievements.

 

[grannymh]

Unfortunately it is not an objective truth recognised by everyone, as we can see from the atrocities committed by human beings throughout history and throughout the world - and at this very moment in Syria and elsewhere. That is why an appeal to conscience is not enough to convince everyone that life is worthy of profound respect. Jesus Himself used the argument from Design as evidence that there is a loving Father who cares for all His creatures…

An objective truth does not owe its existence to recognition by all persons. Nor does objective truth need an appeal to conscience. Objective truth is.

Atrocities are committed because people are free to deny objective truth. But that awful denial does not change the profound worth of each person. People are responsible for their own actions regardless of what they think about others.

 

[tonyrey]

Unfortunately it is not an objective truth recognised by everyone, as we can see from the atrocities committed by human beings throughout history and throughout the world - and at this very moment in Syria and elsewhere. That is why an appeal to conscience is not enough to convince everyone that life is worthy of profound respect. Jesus Himself used the argument from Design as evidence that there is a loving Father who cares for all His creatures…

I entirely agree with you but an obdurate sceptic can always say:%between%

“Look down there. Tell me. Would you really feel any pity if one of those dots stopped moving forever? If I offered you twenty thousand pounds for every dot that stopped, would you really, old man, tell me to keep my money, or would you calculate how many dots you could afford to spare?”

youtube.com/watch?v=8i47-QBL4Qo:

 

[inocente]

This is the outcome with which secularists are faced. Without Design there is no bulwark against the rejection of an individual’s right to life. If people think we don’t exist for any purpose we are at the mercy of those who may decide our life is no longer valuable. It may not always be evident even to ourselves what our value or purpose is but that doesn’t mean we have none. There is no logical stopping place on the descent from universalism - humanism - egoism - nihilism. Either everything has some ultimate value or nothing has any value whatsoever…

This sounds mighty complicated. A more usual argument in both the Christian and secular world is that value and purpose arise out of who and what we love, and knowing that someone is or could be loved is the moral basis for regarding them as sacred.

Love is something we all can share, and love is often its own purpose, nothing else is needed. Searching for some other purpose probably always detracts from love. The song is called All You Need Is Love, not All You Need Is A Purpose (or All You Need Is Design ). c.f.1 Cor 13.

 

[grannymh]

I entirely agree with you but an obdurate sceptic can always say:

“Look down there. Tell me. Would you really feel any pity if one of those dots stopped moving forever? If I offered you twenty thousand pounds for every dot that stopped, would you really, old man, tell me to keep my money, or would you calculate how many dots you could afford to spare?”

youtube.com/watch?v=8i47-QBL4Qo:

The objective value of a person exists period. Who really cares if someone calls a person a dot. Names do not change the fact that the human person is worthy of profound respect.

Please note that persons, themselves, can choose unworthy actions. Yet, evil actions do not change the basic body and soul, into a different being. Recall that Christ also died for sinners. The good thief was worthy of Christ’s victory over death.

 

[tonyrey]

This is the outcome with which secularists are faced. Without Design there is no bulwark against the rejection of an individual’s right to life. If people think we don’t exist for any purpose we are at the mercy of those who may decide our life is no longer valuable. It may not always be evident even to ourselves what our value or purpose is but that doesn’t mean we have none. There is no logical stopping place on the descent from universalism - humanism - egoism - nihilism. Either everything has some ultimate value or nothing has any value whatsoever…

It is not complicated when you come to face to face with unscrupulous people.They will laugh at you if you start talking to them about love. Provided they can get what they want nothing else matters - except the consequences. The only language they understand is the price they will have to pay. That is why Jesus insisted so emphatically on the reality of hell. Criminals may escape punishment in this world but not in the next.

But what if they don’t believe in life after death? There is only one other deterrent apart from prison and execution. It is found in the Greek concept of Nemesis and the Indian doctrine of Karma. Our virtues bring their own reward and our vices incur their own punishment. Self-love leads to isolation because it alienates others. No one wants to live with people who want everything their way. They create for themselves a hell on earth. Without love wealth and power are worthless…

As so often Shakespeare summed it up beautifully:

“Who would Fardels bear,
To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscovered Country, from whose bourn
No Traveller returns, Puzzles the will,
And makes us rather bear those ills we have,
Than fly to others that we know not of.” - Hamlet

No one can be absolutely sure that death is the final destination. To sow the seeds of doubt in the sceptic’s mind is the first step towards salvation. Paradoxically an appeal to self-interest is the best way to encourage unselfishness. In His wisdom Jesus knows the prospect of being damned brings people to their senses and makes them more realistic. It is because He loves us that He warns us about the danger of living for ourselves at the expense of others. Those who condemn Christianity as a religion based on fear ignore the reality of evil. To leave people with the impression that they can do what they like with impunity is a recipe for disaster. God created us **for **love and any deviation from that purpose is bound to lead to grief.

 

[tonyrey]

The objective value of a person exists period. Who really cares if someone calls a person a dot. Names do not change the fact that the human person is worthy of profound respect.

Names change the way people are treated. Several years ago in an online discussion with me an American Jewish professor of philosophy stated that Arabs are “vermin”.

Please note that persons, themselves, can choose unworthy actions. Yet, evil actions do not change the basic body and soul, into a different being. Recall that Christ also died for sinners. The good thief was worthy of Christ’s victory over death.

Christ died for everyone but no one responds to His love unless they **understand **its implications. Many problems in our secular society are due to ignorance rather than malice.