|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group



Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,432
Loc: Under the C
|
Intelligent Design and The Watchmaker Argument
#18914562 - 10/01/13 04:07 AM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Certain theists posit that:
1. The complex inner workings of a watch necessitate an intelligent designer.
2. As with a watch, the complexity of X (a particular organ or organism, the structure of the solar system, life, the universe, anything complex) necessitates a designer.
3. That if you were walking in a forest and saw a watch, you would immediately and intuitively know that it was designed.
4. An eye is more complex than a watch therefore it was intelligently designed and can be recognized as such.
Now there are flaws in all of these assumptions that I am not going to get into. What I am going to address is the obvious (to me) contradiction which deflates the entire argument.
If God had a hand in all of Creation then every single thing would have his indelible stamp. If this were the case then everywhere you look you would see an example of ID.
Make sense so far given the base assumptions?
OK, if everywhere I looked I saw created objects then it would be impossible to pick out an object and say this one is more created than the others therefore -> design!
When examined closely, the whole position collapses.
Let me do this one more time: if every grain of sand on the beach is a design by God, then it is literally impossible to pick out a single grain and say "Aha! This one is special and thus proves Intelligent Design!" The complexity aspect is merely a distraction, like a magician waving his hand, and may be discarded.
--------------------
|
LuSiD enthusiast
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/13
Posts: 4,325
Last seen: 4 years, 10 months
|
Re: Intelligent Design and The Watchmaker Argument [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
#18914587 - 10/01/13 04:26 AM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Just talked about the watchmaker argument in philosophy yesterday, that class=
-------------------- I'm addicted to coke, weed, booze, ludes and speed. Not LSD, you can't get addicted to LSD, it was built by scientists. I ain't got no demons that gonna get woke. In erowid we trust. Just take your damn pills and don't ask any questions, you'll be fine.
|
tribesman
Never satisfied



Registered: 11/19/11
Posts: 948
Loc: Down by the river
|
Re: Intelligent Design and The Watchmaker Argument [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
#18914637 - 10/01/13 05:07 AM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
I cannot fault that logic. 
Conclusion: God is not an architect.
|
eve69
--=..Did Adam and ...?=--



Registered: 04/30/03
Posts: 3,910
Loc: isle de la muerte
Last seen: 1 month, 18 days
|
Re: Intelligent Design and The Watchmaker Argument [Re: tribesman]
#18914648 - 10/01/13 05:18 AM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
presupposing god is a fault in logic the end
-------------------- ...or something
|
tribesman
Never satisfied



Registered: 11/19/11
Posts: 948
Loc: Down by the river
|
Re: Intelligent Design and The Watchmaker Argument [Re: eve69]
#18914730 - 10/01/13 06:06 AM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Well that depends greatly on which god your presuppositions are aimed at, Because every text written by humans does exactly that. Are You saying it is wrong To try and understand God(s) it such a thing even exists?
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group



Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,432
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: Intelligent Design and The Watchmaker Argument [Re: tribesman]
#18915823 - 10/01/13 11:52 AM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
The word 'God' is a pointer that doesn't point to anything. What I mean is that there is no clear definition; every single person has their own definition. Therefore there is nothing to study; nor does it even make sense to say that one believes in such an ill-defined entity.
--------------------
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group



Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,432
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: Intelligent Design and The Watchmaker Argument [Re: LuSiD enthusiast]
#18915830 - 10/01/13 11:53 AM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
LuSiD enthusiast said: Just talked about the watchmaker argument in philosophy yesterday, that class=
And...?
--------------------
|
eve69
--=..Did Adam and ...?=--



Registered: 04/30/03
Posts: 3,910
Loc: isle de la muerte
Last seen: 1 month, 18 days
|
Re: Intelligent Design and The Watchmaker Argument [Re: tribesman]
#18916006 - 10/01/13 12:40 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
tribesman said: Well that depends greatly on which god your presuppositions are aimed at, Because every text written by humans does exactly that. Are You saying it is wrong To try and understand God(s) it such a thing even exists?
I'm saying Intelligent Design isn't a logical proposition. As someone else said God isn't part of any logical argument. You can't start with God and then make proposals because they are already false.
-------------------- ...or something
|
Lazarus.Long
Happy to be here now!



Registered: 09/10/13
Posts: 83
Loc: World as Myth
|
Re: Intelligent Design and The Watchmaker Argument [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
#18916219 - 10/01/13 01:21 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
OrgoneConclusion said:
If God had a hand in all of Creation then every single thing would have his indelible stamp. If this were the case then everywhere you look you would see an example of ID.
Let me do this one more time: if every grain of sand on the beach is a design by God, then it is literally impossible to pick out a single grain and say "Aha! This one is special and thus proves Intelligent Design!" The complexity aspect is merely a distraction, like a magician waving his hand, and may be discarded.
I believe using a grain of sand as an example, is off by an incredible scale.
IE. not seeing the forest for the trees.
Everything within everything ticks to the clock of quantum mechanical properties.
That may be a more appropriate scale to look for this underlying intelligent design. (note I did not mention a God)
Just a postulation.
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group



Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,432
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: Intelligent Design and The Watchmaker Argument [Re: Lazarus.Long]
#18916277 - 10/01/13 01:35 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
I fail to get your point. Let's try again. According to IDers ALL objects are created. They then say the complexity is the hallmark of creation even though simple objects are also created. This does not compute.
--------------------
|
Spacerific
- - - >


Registered: 10/13/12
Posts: 4,923
Last seen: 8 years, 10 months
|
Re: Intelligent Design and The Watchmaker Argument [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
#18916570 - 10/01/13 02:45 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Well obviously everything that we know of has tendencies towards self-organization into ever more complex structures. From atoms forming molecules to chemistry and life and social primates forming the internet, on and on it seems to replicate itself to no end, following some kind of internal drive.
What are we talking about here, what allegedly is the source of this evident order and tendency to create more order of increasing complexity? Because if so, then that will probably be the mindfuck of the century. IMO clearly way above our human ability to understand at this point in time.
What can be noticed is that this tendency exists, and it's inherent in all things.
Also, 42
-------------------- Blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear.
For truly, I say to you, many prophets and righteous people longed to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it. - Matthew 13:16
|
tribesman
Never satisfied



Registered: 11/19/11
Posts: 948
Loc: Down by the river
|
Re: Intelligent Design and The Watchmaker Argument [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
#18916869 - 10/01/13 03:40 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
OrgoneConclusion said: The word 'God' is a pointer that doesn't point to anything. What I mean is that there is no clear definition; every single person has their own definition. Therefore there is nothing to study; nor does it even make sense to say that one believes in such an ill-defined entity.
I agree wholeheartedly.
|
Yogi1
Squatchin
Registered: 04/01/13
Posts: 1,015
Last seen: 4 years, 2 months
|
Re: Intelligent Design and The Watchmaker Argument [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
#18923572 - 10/02/13 09:41 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
I'm going to dodge the second cumming.
--------------------
|
Deckard_Cain
Mystic


Registered: 09/25/13
Posts: 568
Last seen: 1 year, 1 month
|
Re: Intelligent Design and The Watchmaker Argument [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
#18923662 - 10/02/13 10:02 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
OrgoneConclusion said: If God had a hand in all of Creation then every single thing would have his indelible stamp. If this were the case then everywhere you look you would see an example of ID.
Make sense so far given the base assumptions?
'I understand but I do not agree' Spock I think the watchmaker arguement is fallacious but so is what you wrote there. Pulling out assumptions out of the imagination. Assumptions : everything would have a stamp, you could see the stamps. Some one could actually turn that around and say that the designer is so far beyond a human that the stamps are invisible to humans, that the stamps are visible but not to everyone (believing is seeing) or that a stamp is not required for a design. Then from what I see in arguments the next step folks follow is that since their opposition's points are refuted then the opposing view is false. That's a fallacy which I find very common(one of your points is false there for I am right and you are wrong) ...
When I first came across intelligent design it was presented to me by scientists who did not go to church or believe in the bible. The idea of intelligent design was about an inherent intelligence in existence. An intelligence does not have to be human consciousness. Plant roots are intelligent in how they discover nutrients in the soil, bees are intelligent in how they dance to tell other bees where the pollen is.
I think ID got taken over by an agenda train - derailing philosophy and turning it into a circus.
More on this. Like recognizes like. Humans will find man-like patterns in the information they view. Whether those patterns are there objectively or not is a big question (and is objectivity even existent?) People who like to get folks to come to a building and hand over their cash for a few hours of talking think they benefit from pointing out certain patterns and naming existing information. Philosophy is harder to do when we are also faced with agendas apart from pure exploration and inquiry imo.
|
eve69
--=..Did Adam and ...?=--



Registered: 04/30/03
Posts: 3,910
Loc: isle de la muerte
Last seen: 1 month, 18 days
|
Re: Intelligent Design and The Watchmaker Argument [Re: Deckard_Cain]
#18924505 - 10/03/13 04:55 AM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
like attracts like because opposites attract
-------------------- ...or something
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Intelligent Design and The Watchmaker Argument [Re: eve69]
#18925307 - 10/03/13 10:42 AM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
that's so deep
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
Deviate
newbie
Registered: 04/20/03
Posts: 4,497
Last seen: 8 years, 5 months
|
Re: Intelligent Design and The Watchmaker Argument [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
#18928349 - 10/03/13 09:52 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
OrgoneConclusion said: The word 'God' is a pointer that doesn't point to anything. What I mean is that there is no clear definition; every single person has their own definition. Therefore there is nothing to study; nor does it even make sense to say that one believes in such an ill-defined entity.
This is the spirituality and mysticism forum. It's not for debates where one must prove his or her position using logic. We of this forum, are interested in what can be known through means inaccessible to the intellect, such as direct perception.
We all seem to agree that the world exists, and we all mostly agree that we exist. We dont believe these things because of logical arguments but because we perceive them to be true. Some of us have begun to discover that our own beings and the world are not independent from each other, but actually everything is part of one eternal reality which has tradionally been called God in our culture, Brahman in the east. The world in all its complexity can be understood as God's shadow, it reveals much about who God is but it is not God itself, at least not the fullness.
If you don't understand this, I don't particularly care but know that logical arguments are of very little value in realizing it. It's a matter of changing your perception. Thats why psychedelics are popular among spiritual seekers, they alter perception much faster than the traditional methods of meditation and prayer.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Intelligent Design and The Watchmaker Argument [Re: Deviate]
#18929563 - 10/04/13 03:31 AM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
I have directly perceived that no god exists. I'm not saying that as a joke. 
But even with this direct perception the mind, using logic, interprets what is perceived. Therefore imo logic is always important to any equation. If the logic is faulty or influenced by fear or emotional needs etc, the equation may be incorrect.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
Deviate
newbie
Registered: 04/20/03
Posts: 4,497
Last seen: 8 years, 5 months
|
Re: Intelligent Design and The Watchmaker Argument [Re: Icelander]
#18930034 - 10/04/13 07:59 AM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said: I have directly perceived that no god exists. I'm not saying that as a joke. 
I don't see how that's possible, you cannot prove a negative. It's far more likely you have never looked in the right place and thats why God seems to not exist to you.
Quick review: In the book of Exodus when the Lord God speaks to Moses from the burning bush, Moses ask what he shall call Him. The Lord tells Moses that his name is "I AM THAT I AM" which can also be translated as "I AM WHO AM", "HE WHO IS" or simply I AM. So according to the Bible, God is the absolute and necessary being. By admitting your own being, you unwittingly confirm your knowledge of God's existence. God is the "I" ever standing before you. As I explained in the other thread, the content of your experiences changes, but your real essence, as the experiencer himself, does not change. If you want to talk to me about logic, then please tell me how you can possibly deny this? It is so obvious.
Quote:
But even with this direct perception the mind, using logic, interprets what is perceived. Therefore imo logic is always important to any equation. If the logic is faulty or influenced by fear or emotional needs etc, the equation may be incorrect.
Good observation. The mind does interpret what it perceives. But I am not saying, throw logic out the window, I am saying perception is more fundamental than logic. God is actually the primodial state of man, it is your own being minus all the construction you have done on it by adding thoughts and mental images. God is what comes before all other thoughts and after them. Still your soul, that is all you must do to perceive God. Why is this so difficult to understand?
Edited by Deviate (10/04/13 08:00 AM)
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Intelligent Design and The Watchmaker Argument [Re: Deviate]
#18930071 - 10/04/13 08:12 AM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
I looked in all the places you looked as I have previously stated and you acknowledged. There was nothing there. If you can assume I haven't looked in the right places I can assume you are not being honest with yourself. But I am not going to assume anything here.
By admitting your own being, you unwittingly confirm your knowledge of God's existence.
More a leap of faith than a leap of logic imo. If consciousness turns out to be a emergent property of brain function then "I" is nothing more than an idea coming from the function of a brain and not more.
IMO the jury is still out on that one.
Why is this so difficult to understand?
It's not, I understand you well enough imo. I'm just not convinced you are right. (or wrong for that matter)
Edited by Icelander (10/04/13 08:21 AM)
|
|