RAZD writes:
Who designed the ID designer(s)?
I would like to address the problem of "who designed the designer(s)" -- even though ID proponents adamantly argue that the question is not relevant to the science involved, because I feel it is very relevant to the issue of whether ID is a faith or not. As such, I suggest that it be put in the {Faith and Belief} forum rather than the ID forum.
I claim (here and elsewhere) that ID is
de facto a form of faith.
Now, let us evaluate the alternatives to see the result:
(1) Nobody\nothing designed the ID designer(s), it\they evolved naturally through totally natural processes. In this case ID defaults to natural laws and processes, including evolution, just as if we didn't assume a designer (so it would be irrelevant to pursue), and continued belief in ID is then based on faith,
OR
(2) Nobody\nothing designed the ID designer(s), it\they have always existed from the beginning of time. In which case they are god(s), being necessarily supernatural to have lived an immortal existence that must also have been non-material before particles coalesced from the cloud of plasma energy at the beginning of time. Belief in them is belief in god(s) and thus a form of faith,
OR
(3) A god or gods designed the ID designer(s), and empowered them to do the designing. With this version the designers become "angels" or demi-gods doing god(s)’s bidding, and, because god(s) is\are now firmly included, ID again ends up being a form of faith,
OR
(4) Other previous ID designer(s) designed the ID designer(s) to replace\assist them. Now move up to that level and repeat the sequence again (computer programmers will recognize this as a DO LOOP). If there is no other answer than an endless cycle of designers, then this too is a supernatural (see #2 above) cycle akin to the Hindu faith of infinitely recurring universes, all the designers are gods by default, and ID again ends up being a form of faith. (This is the "turtles all the way down" version).
Ergo, ID
is de facto a form of faith.
Q.E.D.
Note that this is a logical construction and therefore is dependant on the inherent truth of the statements to be a valid proof of the conclusions.
Absent any refutation of the truth of these statements and the validity of the proof, this means that ID is a form of faith. Whether you accept it or not is irrelevant to the validity of the logical proof.
The designer always was, I know you can't understand that, but, let's say an ID was real, if you were able to understand Him, that would mean that is intellect is equal to yours, and if the creator of the universe's intellect is equal to yours, mine, or anybody else's, you all, are in a world of hurts.
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Removed quoting of RAZD's edit record of message 1. Removed an extraneous "[hide]" (Don't know why RAZD had such in message 1). Cleaned up a bit of other coding.