Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 45 (9208 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: anil dahar
Post Volume: Total: 919,516 Year: 6,773/9,624 Month: 113/238 Week: 30/83 Day: 0/6 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Even if there was a Designer, does it matter?
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 61 of 214 (589807)
11-04-2010 3:34 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by Rahvin
11-04-2010 12:06 PM


Re: Smaller Steps
Thank you, Rahvin; bingo on the nose, for that one!
But I think what you're getting at is the fact that if a designer exists, then the designer exists whether we realized it or not. If we all lived underground and had never seen the sky and believed that it was green, and suddenly broke through to the surface and saw that the sky is actually blue, then the sky was actually blue all along and we were just wrong.
With this great explanation, I'll wait for some of the other votes to come in before continuing on to the next question.
Jon

Check out Apollo's Temple!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by Rahvin, posted 11-04-2010 12:06 PM Rahvin has not replied

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2228
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 62 of 214 (589811)
11-04-2010 4:10 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by Jon
11-04-2010 11:33 AM


Re: Smaller Steps
Jon writes:
If it is true that there was a designer, has it always been true that there was a designer?
I think I understand what you mean now, although your formulation still does not satisfy me. If at time T there was D, then is it true between T and now that there was D at T? Yes, of course it is, historical facts do not change.

"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by Jon, posted 11-04-2010 11:33 AM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by Jon, posted 11-04-2010 5:08 PM Parasomnium has replied

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2228
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 63 of 214 (589812)
11-04-2010 4:18 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by jar
11-04-2010 12:54 PM


Re: Who wrote Shakespeare?
jar writes:
If there was a Designer then there is some additional yet unknown method which the designer uses to effect change.
We are learning, to use your analogy of the eye, just how an eye could be developed, how we can manipulate genes to effect change.
We are reverse engineering the product.
Once we can understand how living things could be created, once we understand the methods for effecting change, even if they are different methods then the original designer used, the original designer becomes irrelevant except in those two areas I have mentioned.
If this is true, and we have to find out what "methods" can be "used" to effect changes, then current science is on the wrong track, because we think things happen naturally, without someone using methods. Therefore it still makes a huge difference whether ID is true or not, because if it isn't we know pretty much how things happened, and if it is, we know nothing.

"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by jar, posted 11-04-2010 12:54 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by jar, posted 11-04-2010 5:00 PM Parasomnium has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 99 days)
Posts: 34140
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 64 of 214 (589818)
11-04-2010 5:00 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by Parasomnium
11-04-2010 4:18 PM


Re: Who wrote Shakespeare?
We have been wrong before, that is how advances happen.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Parasomnium, posted 11-04-2010 4:18 PM Parasomnium has not replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 65 of 214 (589823)
11-04-2010 5:08 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by Parasomnium
11-04-2010 4:10 PM


Re: Smaller Steps
If at time T there was D, then is it true between T and now that there was D at T? Yes
Good. Very sorry for the poor wording, by the way.
But with that in mind; time for the next question (easier one):
If something is true, is it true?
Jon

Check out Apollo's Temple!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Parasomnium, posted 11-04-2010 4:10 PM Parasomnium has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by Parasomnium, posted 11-04-2010 6:16 PM Jon has replied

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2228
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 66 of 214 (589838)
11-04-2010 6:16 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by Jon
11-04-2010 5:08 PM


Re: Smaller Steps
Jon writes:
If something is true, is it true?
Self-referential sentences that assert their own falsehood aside, yes.

"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by Jon, posted 11-04-2010 5:08 PM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by Jon, posted 11-04-2010 7:34 PM Parasomnium has replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 67 of 214 (589852)
11-04-2010 7:34 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by Parasomnium
11-04-2010 6:16 PM


Re: Smaller Steps
Jon writes:
If something is true, is it true?
... yes.
If evolution by means of natural selection is true, then it is true? If the Big Bang is true, then it is true? In fact, we could say this about any thing for which science has put forth an opinion: if that opinion is true, then it is true, no?
Jon

Check out Apollo's Temple!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by Parasomnium, posted 11-04-2010 6:16 PM Parasomnium has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by Parasomnium, posted 11-05-2010 10:25 AM Jon has replied

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2228
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 68 of 214 (589969)
11-05-2010 10:25 AM
Reply to: Message 67 by Jon
11-04-2010 7:34 PM


Re: Smaller Steps
Another strange concept: a true opinion. But let's not dwell on that. In fact let's not dwell, period. Cut to the chase, please.

"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by Jon, posted 11-04-2010 7:34 PM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by Jon, posted 11-05-2010 11:47 AM Parasomnium has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 69 of 214 (589982)
11-05-2010 11:15 AM
Reply to: Message 56 by Jon
11-04-2010 11:33 AM


Re: Smaller Steps
If it is true that there was a designer, has it always been true that there was a designer?
HOW ... THE FUCK ... WOULD WE KNOW?!?
Sheesh.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by Jon, posted 11-04-2010 11:33 AM Jon has not replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 70 of 214 (589993)
11-05-2010 11:47 AM
Reply to: Message 68 by Parasomnium
11-05-2010 10:25 AM


Re: Smaller Steps
Another strange concept: a true opinion. But let's not dwell on that. In fact let's not dwell, period. Cut to the chase, please.
This last question is the chase. Your answering it will cut us straight there
Jon

Check out Apollo's Temple!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by Parasomnium, posted 11-05-2010 10:25 AM Parasomnium has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by Phat, posted 11-05-2010 12:46 PM Jon has not replied
 Message 72 by Parasomnium, posted 11-06-2010 9:23 AM Jon has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18655
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 4.4


Message 71 of 214 (590007)
11-05-2010 12:46 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by Jon
11-05-2010 11:47 AM


Re: Smaller Steps
Jon writes:
This last question is the chase. Your answering it will cut us straight there..
Whom is chasing whom?
Perhaps a better question?
1) What are we chasing? (The truth, perhaps)
If so, does it matter IF there is a designer or not? (Only if the desired outcome changes) As Adequate succinctly stated: How would we know? (We wouldnt) Thus...what are we chasing again??

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by Jon, posted 11-05-2010 11:47 AM Jon has not replied

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2228
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 72 of 214 (590145)
11-06-2010 9:23 AM
Reply to: Message 70 by Jon
11-05-2010 11:47 AM


Re: Smaller Steps
If by "true opinion" you mean a belief held in something that is indeed the case, then I can still not see a logical connection. A fact is not a fact because one believes in it. Also, one can believe something to be true for the wrong reasons.
Anyway, let's have it.

"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by Jon, posted 11-05-2010 11:47 AM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by Jon, posted 11-06-2010 12:45 PM Parasomnium has replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 73 of 214 (590166)
11-06-2010 12:45 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by Parasomnium
11-06-2010 9:23 AM


The Chase Cut
I did not say a 'true opinion'. If what one holds as an opinion on something is in fact true, then it is true. If I think something is one way, and it is indeed that way, then it is true that it is that way. The fact that I had an opinion on it does not rule out my opinion being wrong. But, this is going beyond the point.
As the point I wanted to make: If it is true that there was a designer, then it is true that there was a designer; and if it is true that the opinions of science are accurate, then it is true that the opinions of science are accurate.
These two things do not exclude one another. Thus, even if there WAS/IS a designer, it has no bearing on the things we have already or will discover as truths about our world.
Jon

Check out Apollo's Temple!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by Parasomnium, posted 11-06-2010 9:23 AM Parasomnium has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by Parasomnium, posted 11-06-2010 3:49 PM Jon has replied

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2228
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 74 of 214 (590183)
11-06-2010 3:49 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by Jon
11-06-2010 12:45 PM


Re: The Chase Cut
Jon writes:
[...] even if there WAS/IS a designer, it has no bearing on the things we have already or will discover as truths about our world.
Well, as it stands, if the "opinions" of science are accurate, then there most probably was no designer. And if there was a designer after all, then it's very curious that the consensus of the scientific world would be about 180 degrees opposite to the truth. Mind you, I'm not saying that the scientific community says that there definitely is/was no designer/god. Science simply has no reason to contemplate the possibility, because simpler explanations suffice.
Most of us trust the results of scientific inquiry enough to "risk" our lives in flying contraptions controlled largely by electronic devices that rely on quantum mechanics, which is a branch of science that possibly nobody understands completely. Or we ingest impressively named chemicals prescribed by our doctors to cure even more impressively named diseases that would have killed us only half a century ago. In short, we have great faith in the methods by which science acquires its "opinions". This faith is justified because, generally, scientific explanations work.
In the case of biology, the explanation in question is the theory of evolution, which even explains things that, when viewed from the point of view of Intelligent Design, can only be called "anomalies", for bearing such remarkable likeness to bad design. So, if there was a designer, then this must have repercussions for the way we acquire knowledge, because our current way of doing so tells us that no designer was involved. If we are wrong about that, what else are we wrong about?

"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by Jon, posted 11-06-2010 12:45 PM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by jar, posted 11-06-2010 4:00 PM Parasomnium has replied
 Message 80 by ringo, posted 11-06-2010 5:37 PM Parasomnium has not replied
 Message 84 by Jon, posted 11-07-2010 6:35 PM Parasomnium has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 99 days)
Posts: 34140
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 75 of 214 (590184)
11-06-2010 4:00 PM
Reply to: Message 74 by Parasomnium
11-06-2010 3:49 PM


Re: The Chase Cut
In the case of biology, the explanation in question is the theory of evolution, which even explains things that, when viewed from the point of view of Intelligent Design, can only be called "anomalies", for bearing such remarkable likeness to bad design. So, if there was a designer, then this must have repercussions for the way we acquire knowledge, because our current way of doing so tells us that no designer was involved. If we are wrong about that, what else are we wrong about?
We are likely wrong about much of what we know, or at least our knowledge is only as good as it can be so far.
But that has always been true, we learn from the things we get wrong, and it is the knowledge that what we know is wrong that leads us to the next step.
BUT...
my initial question is slightly different.
If there is some designer then that designer has some method of effecting change. Now determining how change is effected is what Science has shown us time after time. Questions like that are grist for the Scientific method.
Once the method is known, then the designer itself becomes irrelevant, relevant in only the two areas I have mentioned.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by Parasomnium, posted 11-06-2010 3:49 PM Parasomnium has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by Parasomnium, posted 11-06-2010 4:25 PM jar has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024