RE: Why do the arguments for teleology and irreducible complexity automatically=The Christian God?
View related threads:
(in this forum
| in all forums)
|
Logged in as: Guest
|
|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Why do the arguments for teleology and irreducible ... - 7/6/2010 7:56:39 AM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 5796
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: online
|
quote:
You didn't answer the question: EtaCar asked, "Who do you consider to be the Designer?" The question is irrelevant to this thread and the pure science of ID theory. Nice try, boys... 
quote:
Since the universe does not contain infinite energy, And we have absolutely NO way to determine the validity of this assumption!
quote:
In fact it might very well be within the realm of possibillity for a hyper-advanced civilasation (sp?) to create baby-universes of their own. "Baby universes"? Now who is spouting "false logic"! Sorry, WH, but there is only ONE universe by its very definition, thus only ONE First Cause!
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do the arguments for teleology and irreducible ... - 7/6/2010 10:15:09 AM
|
|
|
Clement19
Posts: 121
Joined: 6/27/2010
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: StephenJ
I find myself being dragged out of my Pentecostal upbringing and into a far more skeptical worldview. So basically if I am a skeptic in regards to those belief, and their creator gods, why shouldn't I be a skeptic about the God of the faith that I was raised to believe in.
I think it's good to be skeptical. Ask God, "God, I hear a lot of people talking about You, but have little evidence beyond bald assertions with little logical or factual support. So please clear things up for me. Are You, in fact, real, or not?"
I passed through a skeptical phase, and even "fired" God at one point as being an anachronism with no present utility.
But, being a burgeoning scientist, I made a hypothesis (God does, in fact, exist) and conducted an experiment. I asked God to "prove" to my satisfaction that He/She/It/They was/were real.
Two days later a cloud of glory came out of the heavens and hovered over me, enveloping me in a bath of warmth, love, peace, joy, and utter satisfaction. With tears streaming down my face, I cried, "Okay, okay! You win!"
I felt as if I'd held up a thimble-sized glass into the air, asking for a drop of water, and Niagara Falls had just opened up.
What does it all mean? I dunno. My brain is usually the last one to catch up. I still prefer double-blind studies to draw conclusions, but in this case I just have my experience, which is ephemeral and subjective.
But I believe.
Nonetheless, I accept other views, as equally real as my own. My experience is just that, my experience. May you find peace and blessing on your journey, StephenJ, and the answers you seek. Everything finds its own level in this universe. In Jesus' name I found my place in the universe. I knew that I was journeying home in the Father. But I dare not judge the "reality" of others' journeys, because that judgment would mar my own.
Jesus said "With what you judge, you yourself will be judged." So I merely testify concerning my experience. My testimony may have little or no validity for others.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do the arguments for teleology and irreducible ... - 7/6/2010 2:03:43 PM
|
|
|
shakezula
Posts: 651
Joined: 3/9/2009
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
You obviously have ZERO understanding of the scientific discipline of intelligent design theory. ID in its purest form has NOTHING to do with identification or characterization of the "designer". The scientific discipline of ID is based on identifying and characterizing the objects or events under question to determine their probability of resulting from random, unguided, purposeless processes OR from intelligent agency. If certain factors indicate IA then certain inferences may be drawn regarding the nature of the designer(s) from the design. There is NO identification of Creator God from ID theory, so stop this incessant misinformation!
what you state here is exactly the same point stephen and i are making. in your haste to disagree, you didn't notice that we were all saying the same thing.
_____________________________
watch out for the oo moo and the blehblehbleh
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do the arguments for teleology and irreducible ... - 7/6/2010 2:07:21 PM
|
|
|
shakezula
Posts: 651
Joined: 3/9/2009
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: evry1needsgod
And why must you spread this skepticism on a CHRISTIAN discussion board??? I see no point to this other than to preach your own religion of agnostic Atheism. Is that your real agenda?
different people come here for different reasons. most just come to discuss things. i don't see why it's a big deal when people come here have different belief systems.
_____________________________
watch out for the oo moo and the blehblehbleh
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do the arguments for teleology and irreducible ... - 7/6/2010 2:09:53 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 5796
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: online
|
quote:
what you state here is exactly the same point stephen and i are making. in your haste to disagree, you didn't notice that we were all saying the same thing. How nice. Then why don't you rebuke EtaCar and veritas for their misunderstanding of ID theory...
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do the arguments for teleology and irreducible ... - 7/6/2010 2:39:30 PM
|
|
|
evry1needsgod
Posts: 2398
Joined: 2/4/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: shakezula
quote:
ORIGINAL: evry1needsgod
And why must you spread this skepticism on a CHRISTIAN discussion board??? I see no point to this other than to preach your own religion of agnostic Atheism. Is that your real agenda?
different people come here for different reasons. most just come to discuss things. i don't see why it's a big deal when people come here have different belief systems.
I have no issue if one attends these forums with honest intellectual concerns. If one is seeking for honest truth, then by all means, ask away! But if one has already made up their mind reading God and Christianity, and who's only purpose is to spread their own Atheistic/Agnostic religion, then yes I will take issue to that. This is not the place the preach Atheism.
_____________________________
"Believers are saved from their sin, not merely in their sinning!"--drmark
"Our will are ours, we know not how; our wills are ours, to make them Thine." - Alfred, Lord Tennyson
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do the arguments for teleology and irreducible ... - 7/6/2010 3:39:05 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 5796
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: online
|
quote:
EtaCar and veritas are talking about ID as it is practiced. as it is practiced, ID is explicitly religious. You really don't get this, do you! ID is practiced by archaelogists, cryptologists, forensic investigators and so forth. What "explicit religion" are they all practicing?
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do the arguments for teleology and irreducible ... - 7/6/2010 3:54:08 PM
|
|
|
Veritas
Posts: 414
Joined: 4/19/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
quote:
EtaCar and veritas are talking about ID as it is practiced. as it is practiced, ID is explicitly religious. You really don't get this, do you! ID is practiced by archaelogists, cryptologists, forensic investigators and so forth. What "explicit religion" are they all practicing?
You claim archeologists, cryptologists, forensic investigators and so forth use ID. But they don't shy away from identifying the methods, mechanisms, and identity of the agents that produced the evidence they find. In stark contrast, ID proponents cannot discuss the methods, mechanisms or identity of the Designer without admitting that ID is based on religion.
ID as practiced is indistinguishable from creationism which makes it religion.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do the arguments for teleology and irreducible ... - 7/6/2010 3:55:19 PM
|
|
|
WormHeart
Posts: 404
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: Denmark - pride of Scandinavia
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
quote:
In fact it might very well be within the realm of possibillity for a hyper-advanced civilasation (sp?) to create baby-universes of their own. "Baby universes"? Now who is spouting "false logic"! Sorry, WH, but there is only ONE universe by its very definition, thus only ONE First Cause!
I'll grant you that it is highly speculative and not very founded in present day scientific knowlegde, so I should not have been carried away and used the example.
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
quote:
Since the universe does not contain infinite energy, And we have absolutely NO way to determine the validity of this assumption!
Well, according to the prevalent theory, the universe had a clear beginning some 14,6 billion years ago and have been expanding ever since. Hence it's size will be finite, since there is a limit as to how large it has grown in that time.
Since it is not infinite in size, it would neither be infinite in energy.
I'll look it up to be certain. (Might educate myself along the way)
WormHeart
_____________________________
WormHeart got married
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do the arguments for teleology and irreducible ... - 7/6/2010 3:58:09 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 5796
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: online
|
quote:
I'll look it up to be certain. No need, WH. You know "prevalent theory" just fine, but no one could ever possibly know the amount of mass/energy in the universe. That's my point.
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do the arguments for teleology and irreducible ... - 7/6/2010 4:11:18 PM
|
|
|
WormHeart
Posts: 404
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: Denmark - pride of Scandinavia
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
quote:
I'll look it up to be certain. No need, WH. You know "prevalent theory" just fine, but no one could ever possibly know the amount of mass/energy in the universe. That's my point.
Well, they dont just pull a number out of a hat. If you read the thread "Science is wrong" you can read about general relativity and quantum mechanics.
There's a lot of experimental data to back up the current understandig, although it is far from complete.
They have estimations on the ratio of matter, dark matter end dark energy, even if the while picture is blurry.
WormHeart
_____________________________
WormHeart got married
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do the arguments for teleology and irreducible ... - 7/6/2010 4:44:25 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 5796
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: online
|
quote:
You claim archeologists, cryptologists, forensic investigators and so forth use ID. But they don't shy away from identifying the methods, mechanisms, and identity of the agents that produced the evidence they find. It's not my "claim", it's a fact of operational science! When conclusions are drawn about the nature of the designer, then the ID theorist has gone beyond merely distinguishing IA from random unguided processes.
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do the arguments for teleology and irreducible ... - 7/7/2010 12:06:06 AM
|
|
|
Veritas
Posts: 414
Joined: 4/19/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
quote:
You claim archeologists, cryptologists, forensic investigators and so forth use ID. But they don't shy away from identifying the methods, mechanisms, and identity of the agents that produced the evidence they find. It's not my "claim", it's a fact of operational science! When conclusions are drawn about the nature of the designer, then the ID theorist has gone beyond merely distinguishing IA from random unguided processes.
It certainly is your claim -- You're the one making the claim. And it's hardly a fact.
ID proponents look at a system, like a flagellum, and say it is irreducibly complex because if you remove parts, it fails to function as a flagellum, dismissing the fact that a subset of the components make a perfectly serviceable Type III secretory and transport system. Even if one dismisses the fact that it could have evolved, ID proposes no methods or mechanisms for the creation of the flagellum. All they have is irreducible complexity and specified complexity -- no methods, no mechanisms, and no Intelligent Agent(s), at least not One they are willing to identify.
For archeologists, it isn't enough to eliminate (or dismiss) natural causes. They do not look at a pottery shard, and say "That sure looks complex; it must be the work of some unspecified intelligent agent using some unknown methods." They must show that the specific methods and mechanisms used to create an atrifact are available to the particular intelligent agents the study -- humans.
Just what do archeologists and IDists have in common? Certainly not ID or SC. Archeologists do not dismiss/ignore natural causes. Unlike ID proponents, archeologists must show that known intelligent agents, specifically humans, are capable of the methods and mechanisms that produce the artifacts they study. Just what are the principles of ID that archeologists use?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do the arguments for teleology and irreducible ... - 7/7/2010 12:20:57 PM
|
|
|
DanJames
Posts: 580
Joined: 12/13/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: WormHeart
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
quote:
I'll look it up to be certain. No need, WH. You know "prevalent theory" just fine, but no one could ever possibly know the amount of mass/energy in the universe. That's my point.
Well, they dont just pull a number out of a hat. If you read the thread "Science is wrong" you can read about general relativity and quantum mechanics.
There's a lot of experimental data to back up the current understandig, although it is far from complete.
They have estimations on the ratio of matter, dark matter end dark energy, even if the while picture is blurry.
WormHeart
I don't think that the "first cause" argument is every really used to prove an omni-everything God such as the one in the bible, it only is used to demonstrate that the universe had a supernatural beginner. The nature of the beginner is derived with other arguments. You see, this is why Dawkins' logic was wrong when he said "You Christians are atheists against all gods except for the one. We're just atheists of one more god." There is a huge difference between the belief that there is only one god and there is no god at all. If you have one god, ANY god, you can come to terms with the nature of the universe's beginnings. So there is no reason for you or I to object to the idea of a first mover, since we both believe in supernatural beings capable of bringing the natural into existence.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do the arguments for teleology and irreducible ... - 7/7/2010 12:57:02 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 5796
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: online
|
quote:
I don't think that the "first cause" argument is every really used to prove an omni-everything God such as the one in the bible, it only is used to demonstrate that the universe had a supernatural beginner. Perhaps in its purest form, but I would consider that to be more related to infinite regression than causality. When I consider the universal law of causality, I look at the observational data that demonstrates EVERY effect ALWAYS has a cause sufficient to produce it. Thus, only an omnipotent God could cause a universe containing such magnitude of mass/energy as ours. Only an infinite God could cause a universe of such spatial magnitude as ours. Only an eternal God could cause a universe of such temporal magnitude as ours. Only the Creator God of the Bible qualifies on all counts to be this First Cause!
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do the arguments for teleology and irreducible ... - 7/7/2010 1:51:02 PM
|
|
|
Veritas
Posts: 414
Joined: 4/19/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
When I consider the universal law of causality, I look at the observational data that demonstrates EVERY effect ALWAYS has a cause sufficient to produce it.
Amazing! You continue to make that claim, despite the fact I've given examples that show it's false. A small spark can cause a raging fire or an explosion. You also ignore the fact that there are some effects for which we can find no cause -- sub-atomic particles sometimes decay spontaneously. And relativity tells us that when an effect has a cause, the cause always occurs before the effect - specifically the cause is ALWAYS in the past light cone of the effect. Light cones do not enter or leave the space-time; they are only defined in this universe. Finally, your argument has no cause.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do the arguments for teleology and irreducible ... - 7/7/2010 4:26:47 PM
|
|
|
EtaCar
Posts: 109
Joined: 6/30/2010
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
No need, WH. You know "prevalent theory" just fine, but no one could ever possibly know the amount of mass/energy in the universe. That's my point.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_of_the_observable_universe#Matter_content
Looks like they can know...
Also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-energy_Universe
If the universe has a flat geometry, as the CMB indicates, then the total energy of the universe is ZERO. Which pretty much shoots down:
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
Thus, only an omnipotent God could cause a universe containing such magnitude of mass/energy as ours.
No deity required.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do the arguments for teleology and irreducible ... - 7/7/2010 7:30:05 PM
|
|
|
DanJames
Posts: 580
Joined: 12/13/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Veritas
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
When I consider the universal law of causality, I look at the observational data that demonstrates EVERY effect ALWAYS has a cause sufficient to produce it.
Amazing! You continue to make that claim, despite the fact I've given examples that show it's false. A small spark can cause a raging fire or an explosion. You also ignore the fact that there are some effects for which we can find no cause -- sub-atomic particles sometimes decay spontaneously. And relativity tells us that when an effect has a cause, the cause always occurs before the effect - specifically the cause is ALWAYS in the past light cone of the effect. Light cones do not enter or leave the space-time; they are only defined in this universe. Finally, your argument has no cause.
Picking the starting point as the spark is the only way to prove your point, Veritas. You could also pick the amount of energy that had to be absorbed from the sun to make all the foliage, the amount of time and energy it took to produce all that chlorophyll to absorb the sun's energy, the amount of energy required to make a star, etc. There is no way we're going to say that the amount of energy produced in a fire is more than the amount of energy that went into the fire. Also, I'm no physics major, but I can imagine that as a physicist, I would be intellectually dissatisfied with the idea that anything happens purely spontaneously, in other words, for no reason at all.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do the arguments for teleology and irreducible ... - 7/7/2010 7:51:20 PM
|
|
|
TheNameless
Posts: 142
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline
|
My question is this.... who cares what we call this "deity"? Most ancient religions have a god of benevolence, and a lesser god of evil. The whole theme of universal balance is in every religion and that carries into the natural world so why not just accept that?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do the arguments for teleology and irreducible ... - 7/7/2010 8:27:31 PM
|
|
|
DanJames
Posts: 580
Joined: 12/13/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: TheNameless
My question is this.... who cares what we call this "deity"? Most ancient religions have a god of benevolence, and a lesser god of evil. The whole theme of universal balance is in every religion and that carries into the natural world so why not just accept that?
Because this ancient god of benevolence has taken the liberty of describing himself through the Old Testament prophets, and revealed himself through his Son, Jesus Christ.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do the arguments for teleology and irreducible ... - 7/7/2010 9:28:35 PM
|
|
|
Veritas
Posts: 414
Joined: 4/19/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DanJames
quote:
ORIGINAL: Veritas
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
When I consider the universal law of causality, I look at the observational data that demonstrates EVERY effect ALWAYS has a cause sufficient to produce it.
Amazing! You continue to make that claim, despite the fact I've given examples that show it's false. A small spark can cause a raging fire or an explosion. You also ignore the fact that there are some effects for which we can find no cause -- sub-atomic particles sometimes decay spontaneously. And relativity tells us that when an effect has a cause, the cause always occurs before the effect - specifically the cause is ALWAYS in the past light cone of the effect. Light cones do not enter or leave the space-time; they are only defined in this universe. Finally, your argument has no cause.
Picking the starting point as the spark is the only way to prove your point, Veritas. You could also pick the amount of energy that had to be absorbed from the sun to make all the foliage, the amount of time and energy it took to produce all that chlorophyll to absorb the sun's energy, the amount of energy required to make a star, etc. There is no way we're going to say that the amount of energy produced in a fire is more than the amount of energy that went into the fire. Also, I'm no physics major, but I can imagine that as a physicist, I would be intellectually dissatisfied with the idea that anything happens purely spontaneously, in other words, for no reason at all.
We're talking about cause and effect. If you were asked for the cause of a wild fire, would you seriously answer that the cause was chlorophyl and the energy from the sun, or would you say the fire was caused by a spark?
You may not find it intellectually satisfying, but there is an inherent randomness to QM.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do the arguments for teleology and irreducible ... - 7/7/2010 9:39:13 PM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 3277
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: TheNameless
My question is this.... who cares what we call this "deity"? Most ancient religions have a god of benevolence, and a lesser god of evil. The whole theme of universal balance is in every religion and that carries into the natural world so why not just accept that?
The idea of a universal balance between good and evil comes from eastern religious thought, it is not something taught in Scripture.
_____________________________
אשת־חיל מי ימצא ורחק מפנינים מכרה
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do the arguments for teleology and irreducible ... - 7/7/2010 9:40:20 PM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 3277
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: offline
|
quote:
You may not find it intellectually satisfying, but there is an inherent randomness to QM.
Unless we accept string theory.
_____________________________
אשת־חיל מי ימצא ורחק מפנינים מכרה
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do the arguments for teleology and irreducible ... - 7/8/2010 12:50:01 PM
|
|
|
TheNameless
Posts: 142
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
When I consider the universal law of causality, I look at the observational data that demonstrates EVERY effect ALWAYS has a cause sufficient to produce it. Thus, only an omnipotent God could cause a universe containing such magnitude of mass/energy as ours. Only an infinite God could cause a universe of such spatial magnitude as ours. Only an eternal God could cause a universe of such temporal magnitude as ours. Only the Creator God of the Bible qualifies on all counts to be this First Cause!
Yes an omnipotent God....ORRRR.... matter, dark matter that explodes and expands, cools, collapses again due to gravitational forces into a near infinitely small point of matter, explodes again due to friction and electromagnetic forces and repeat said cycle. It IS possible that if there is indeed a creator (which I believe there to be one) that he created these forces or he IS these forces and laws of nature and cycles with balance.
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
