In what respect? By all means post a thread in the Theology forum and see what happens. If you’re interested in my perspective on “religion” in general then browse my post about “Origin of Religion” (it’s called something like that).
The chicken comes before the egg.
- Burning ghost
- Posts: 3065
- Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am
Re: The chicken comes before the egg.
- Arjen
- Posts: 467
- Joined: January 16th, 2019, 4:53 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Immanuel Kant
Re: The chicken comes before the egg.
A yway, it is your topic, so I will give it a rest. Apologies for going offtopic.
~Immanuel Kant
- Burning ghost
- Posts: 3065
- Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am
Re: The chicken comes before the egg.
If by “intelligent design” you apply it to some “god” concept (rather than an actual deity) then you’d first have to define what you mean by “god” before I could even begin to move toward any discussion on said “god-thing”.
- meaningful_products
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 17
- Joined: January 25th, 2019, 4:17 am
Re: The chicken comes before the egg.
- Arjen
- Posts: 467
- Joined: January 16th, 2019, 4:53 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Immanuel Kant
Re: The chicken comes before the egg.
Burning ghost: I know that some people apply I.D. to a God. Another way to see that is to apply it to a Godlike Demiurgh (like Plato in the sense of polytheism). Plato's idea of course leads to humans that are trying to manipulate DNA and some have suggested that ancient aliens might have. Anyway, my remark was not as specific as that. My remark was just that, somehow, it appears that complete organs and limbs seem to be coded into DNA; being switched on and off by the genes. It is like buying a new car and then selecting the option of a radio, a great paint job and spoilers. Take out the v8 motor for something cheaper and presto, a whole new species of cars has emerged.
So, without addressing who or what would be responsible for the designing, I am questioning if it is even possible to have some mechanism like that appear by means of evolution? Given that no half finished designs have ever been found in fossils, nor in living beings; only handicaps where something went wrong. In my opinion, it is a hard to refute argument for design. If you think differently, without speculating and black boxes, can you refute that? I would be happy if you do actually, because it is one of those unsettling facts that seem to point to my understanding of this being wrong.
~Immanuel Kant
- Burning ghost
- Posts: 3065
- Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am
Re: The chicken comes before the egg.
Change “some” to “practically all” (to add, all those who know how the term is coined in general discussions that question the theory of natural selection) then it’s fine.
The “mechanism” is natural selection? See? You’ve gone full circle here where you’ve turned the view of Intelligent Design on its head and framed as some possible “mechanism” (which there is; called “Natural Selection”).
If you don’t understand the theory of Natural Selection (note: “theory” as in “scientific theory” not random guesswork) or how it relates to molecular biology and genetics then that is something you can choose to address as you see fit. I’ve given suggestions about where to fill in some of the gaps.
I would HIGHLY recommend you go into Youtube and search Sapolsky. There are series of lectures there that are superb - easily the most watchable lecturer I’ve seen on youtube; he jumps straight in no messing around and will take you on an interesting journey regarding how ideas have chopped and changed due to scientific discoveries and more precise measurements.
- Arjen
- Posts: 467
- Joined: January 16th, 2019, 4:53 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Immanuel Kant
Re: The chicken comes before the egg.
~Immanuel Kant
- popsicle
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 1
- Joined: February 25th, 2019, 8:08 am
Re: The chicken comes before the egg.
- Intellectual_Savnot
- Posts: 97
- Joined: November 26th, 2018, 11:07 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Myself
- Location: Wokeville, California
- Contact:
Re: The chicken comes before the egg.
- Arjen
- Posts: 467
- Joined: January 16th, 2019, 4:53 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Immanuel Kant
Re: The chicken comes before the egg.
I understand what evolution is. I am just saying that Darwin himself said that evolution only exists in an existing model: AFTER CREATION. Darwin was, is and always will be a creationist. In no way can evolution theory explain the sudden emergence of life itself. On top of that, the genetic model can't explain for the 'blueprints' of the organs and limbs and such, to develop. Only for switching those on and off. There is also no fossil evidence (nor any living specimens) to show not fully developed organs or limbs.Intellectual_Savnot wrote: ↑February 26th, 2019, 2:26 pm Arjen: My sister and I differ in genetics. I got the dominant genetics of my father, my sister got less of them. Since we are genetically a little different, if I were to have a child with someone and my sister were to do the same with their twin (this never happened that would be very weird) the children would have differing genetics. However, say that due to my very curly hair caused some bug to get stuck in my hair (it has before) and that bug didn't get washed out in the shower, and killed me. My sister got the same bug in her hair but due to her less curly hair she doesn't die to the bug, which is washed out. Now her child would be born and mine would not. Thus, her genes have been naturally selected and the child with my genetics never existed. Sorry for lack of better example, I don't focus well when I listen to Russian Hardbass. Have a good day!
So, this part I question further. It refutes Darwinism and empirical observations. Since the practice and theory differ, the theory must be wrong.
~Immanuel Kant
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023