Intelligent Design

FFT · Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2005 8:37 am Post subject: Intelligent Design

LuckyStrike has expressed a willingness to participate in a debate over Intelligent Design. I agree, on one condition:
You have to show how Intelligent Design is anything but an argument from ignorance, one of those

violations of logical empiricism.
_________________
When Science was in its crib, Religion tried to strangle it. When Science was in its infancy, Religion tried to abuse it. Now that Science is grown up, Religion wants to be in its good graces.

Theology is philosophy/ethics for people who already know what conclusion they want to come to.

SDMD · Show Poodle Joined: 12 Oct 2005 Posts: 253

But that is not possible to being with, as there is no evidence for ID, thus making it not even a science
_________________
Geology: fossils of different ages
Paleontology: fossil sequence & species change over time.
Taxonomy: biological relationships
Evolution: explanation that ties it all together.
Creationism: squeezing eyes shut, wailing "DOES NOT!"

FFT · Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:24 am Post subject:

I'd like to see LS respond, actually. What with all his descent into logical empiricism when it suits him, I'd like to see if he follows through when it doesn't. However, from LS's posts, I gather that he does not actually support ID, as he has stated that evolution stands on its own without God, that any addition would be merely a God of the Gaps argument (those gaps get slimmer every day, too).

So I'm curious as to where this will go.
_________________
When Science was in its crib, Religion tried to strangle it. When Science was in its infancy, Religion tried to abuse it. Now that Science is grown up, Religion wants to be in its good graces.

Theology is philosophy/ethics for people who already know what conclusion they want to come to.