Ultimately, we have not enough evidence to create any provable premise on the creation of the universe.
If not a "god," what/who else would be a "designer"? The word implies an intelligent, thinking entity.
Watchmaker analogy - Wikipedia
Or: Teleological argument - Wikipedia
So let's boil it down to the simplest form for the discussion. At least to start.
The concept is rather clear:
That which is complex, requires a design, which obviously implies something designed it.
A watch doesn't exist without a designer.
Therefore the Universe couldn't exist without a designer.
First question right from the gate, if you presume the concept has merit, that a design implies a designer, why then jump to the conclusion (in the case of the universe/life as we know it) that the designer must be one specific "god"? Or any "god"/"gods" at all?
Does the watchmaker analogy (in terms of God/universe/life) hold water, or fall apart rather quickly?
An elegant argument and spot-on.
It does not jump to God as conclusion; it gracefully sweeps a gesture in God's direction.
The conclusion is a no-brainer.
Only God could design such a thing as a universe?
The analogy goes to the existence of God.
Religion goes to the nature of God and the Design.
The former is a matter of reason.
The latter is a matter of faith.
Everything complex has a designer.
Its the very first line of the theory.
Intelligent design should imply plenty of life all over the Universe.
We can assume intelligent life in every galaxy. How many galaxies are there and how can we communicate with intelligent life in a different galaxy? They may be more advanced than us, but the light from their civilization may be not be visible to us for a few more hundred or thousand years.
Good point. Pretty ridiculous to make a universe of this massive size and then only make one intelligent life. Also, if it was designed, they did a piss poor job. There are many things in life that are not efficient.
Also, if designed, then the designer is an evil ****, not a loving god. Why would they design life so one species has to kill another in order to survive. Wouldn't a loving god not make life so brutal?
All those flaws, the kill or be killed nature of life, all supported by evolution., Even human's ****ty behavior.
Indeed. To me, design fits what I see way better than random chance making things as complicated and interactive as the universe so far discovered. I'm just not so wedded to the idea as to dismiss the possibility that it was purely random. For all we know a gazillion other Universes have started and failed, or developed randomly in ways ours did not.
Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk
How does design fit better? For one, its not random, that's a misconception people use who can't comprehend the reality. The genetic mutations may be random, but the natural selection is not, that allows species with favorable genetics to flourish and pass on those genes. That explains the brutality of life in general. If you ever watch Discovery, you see how brutal life can be, constant fight for survival. Unless the designer is sadistic, evolution explains everything in life.
Careful now. If something isn't random it's what?
Many people would suggest non-random equates to ordered/designed/intended.
Just throwing that out there.
Who or what designed the designer?
But, WHAT design is seen in the universe?
Watchmaker analogy - Wikipedia
Or: Teleological argument - Wikipedia
So let's boil it down to the simplest form for the discussion. At least to start.
The concept is rather clear:
That which is complex, requires a design, which obviously implies something designed it.
A watch doesn't exist without a designer.
Therefore the Universe couldn't exist without a designer.
First question right from the gate, if you presume the concept has merit, that a design implies a designer, why then jump to the conclusion (in the case of the universe/life as we know it) that the designer must be one specific "god"? Or any "god"/"gods" at all?
Does the watchmaker analogy (in terms of God/universe/life) hold water, or fall apart rather quickly?
it's complete garbage, it may not jump to god as conclusion, but it makes another logical fallacy and jumps to a designer, without any logic
Biologicla life requires no designer, it happens
And its false. So right off the bat the supposed logic starts with a logical fallacy. A default position that is unproven. IN fact, in biology, requires no designer at all
I agree, but I'm willing to go down the rabbit hole for the sake of argument (I like arguments, lol, as you'll note from my thread about human evolution). Hypothetically, lets they are correct, and we are a massively advanced, complex design, an organic machine.
Who designed the designer?
Planets. Moons. Stars. Solar systems. Galaxies. Light. Vacuum. Black Holes. Orbits. Gravity. Water. Oxygen. Atmospheres. Minerals. Last but not least - LIFE.
Your dismissal and its concomitant unsupported assertions are duly noted. How is inferring from design to designer a logical fallacy?it's complete garbage, it may not jump to god as conclusion, but it makes another logical fallacy and jumps to a designer, without any logic
Biologicla life requires no designer, it happens
And its false. So right off the bat the supposed logic starts with a logical fallacy. A default position that is unproven. IN fact, in biology, requires no designer at all
Everything complex has a designer.
Yes, and?
That's a superfluous question.So who or what designed the designer?
"By rote" referred to your response. Where in the watchmaker analogy do you find "special pleading"?Yep, special pleading is the basis of nearly every theist argument.
Remember, it's exactly what we have in the Cosmological argument as well. "Something can't come from nothing." Except god, of course, he's special.
The argument is based on premises which may or may not be true. Right now there is no evidence to definitely conclude one way or the other. ALL premises on this issue stem from subjective ideas that cannot be proven. The "Watchmaker Argument" can neither be defeated nor defeat.
Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk
If the Universe was designed then it was designed to produce hydrogen, helium, maybe plastic..etc. Not us. We die instantly everywhere outside of our little enclaves.
Watchmaker analogy - Wikipedia
Or: Teleological argument - Wikipedia
So let's boil it down to the simplest form for the discussion. At least to start.
The concept is rather clear:
That which is complex, requires a design, which obviously implies something designed it.
A watch doesn't exist without a designer.
Therefore the Universe couldn't exist without a designer.
First question right from the gate, if you presume the concept has merit, that a design implies a designer, why then jump to the conclusion (in the case of the universe/life as we know it) that the designer must be one specific "god"? Or any "god"/"gods" at all?
Does the watchmaker analogy (in terms of God/universe/life) hold water, or fall apart rather quickly?
Watchmaker analogy - Wikipedia
Or: Teleological argument - Wikipedia
So let's boil it down to the simplest form for the discussion. At least to start.
The concept is rather clear:
That which is complex, requires a design, which obviously implies something designed it.
A watch doesn't exist without a designer.
Therefore the Universe couldn't exist without a designer.
First question right from the gate, if you presume the concept has merit, that a design implies a designer, why then jump to the conclusion (in the case of the universe/life as we know it) that the designer must be one specific "god"? Or any "god"/"gods" at all?
Does the watchmaker analogy (in terms of God/universe/life) hold water, or fall apart rather quickly?
An elegant argument and spot-on.
It does not jump to God as conclusion; it gracefully sweeps a gesture in God's direction.
The conclusion is a no-brainer.
Only God could design such a thing as a universe?
The analogy goes to the existence of God.
Religion goes to the nature of God and the Design.
The former is a matter of reason.
The latter is a matter of faith.
Yes, that could be too.Or maybe it was designed to produce black holes.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?