Here is one of the most common objections to Intelligent Design and that comes up in discussions surrounding the existence of God. Philosopher Jay Richards offers some good insight about how to think about this intriguing question.
For more on this, check out the Case for the Creator.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
been designed. That is, if we do noi now have positive evidence that some presently known natural law explains the universe, then it “must have been” designed. IGNORANCE=DESIGN, in other words.
As to being able to somehow “see” design, that argument rests upon two unproven assumptions. One is that human beings designed the universe (and life). The only intelligence we know of that designs “complex” things is human intelligence. Claiming that life is designed by analogy to human artifacts is something that needs to be demonstrated by evidence. Life, for example, has more differences than similarities to human-designed artifacts. At the very least, then, you need positive physical evidence of some intelligence other than human that has the capabilities, characteristics, and motives for creating such artifacts. (Analogy may have some value in framing hypotheses, but it has no probative value whatsoever in demonstrating their validity. That requires evidence.)
Olorin, thanks for your comments. You made a comment about ID needing to be "demonstrated by evidence".
What kind of evidence would satisfy that? Do you have necessary and sufficient conditions in mind?
Post a Comment