Intelligent Design.

[Furrowed Brow]

Ok, some have tried to prove God's existence others have tried to prove the opposite. IDers argue that life needs a designer. They usually deny they are sneaking God into science, but you can make your own mind up. The ID type arguments also struggle to gain acceptance as science within the larger scientific community. Questions of predictions and falsifiability arise. There are also points about ID being a lazy answer, and closing down enquiry. But these ID guys and girls don't like to give up easy.

So is it possible to prove that science does not need Intelligent Design argument to explain nature?

[NB I am not asking whether it is possible to prove nature does not need a designer/God. I am really thinking about our methods of enquiry and explanation.]

[jcrawford]

Definition of an intelligent design:

Something that serves a practical purpose because it is intelligently designed.


Everyday examples of intelligent designs:

Bridges, automobiles, airplanes, computers, igloos, grass huts, bee's nests and honeycombs.

Ok, let me get this straight, you are using the word you are defining to define the word. That is not a definition, that is a purpose, but not definition. One cannot use the word they are defining to define the word anymore than one can use scripture alone to prove the validity of the scriptures reliability.

I'm just talking plain English since the design of something (bridge, house, bee's nest, etc) may be qualified as indicating some intelligent purpose behind it.

As for the validity of the Hebrew scriptures, they are self-evident and self-attesting, in no need of further proof.

[Cathar1950]

Although applied in physics, mathematics is a supernatural function of the human mind, since numbers do not consist of physical matter or forces but are only mentally conceived.

They are human constructs not supernatural functions.
We conceive then do to our experiences and imagination.
Both are funtions of our brains and bodies abstracted(mind) from our experiences of the world.
There is nothing outside our experiences. This includes the changes in our life forms(evolution). Think of yoursself as a decendent of a single cell organism or less that has been thru maybe billions of years of changes do to copy errors envinonmental factors and the outcome of the survival of your ancesters.
You remind me of some spiritualist or palm reader always talking in meaningless riddles to confuse the mark before you take their money.
I keep waiting to hear the voices of spirits only to find that you didn't plug in the recorder. Or maybe playing the shell game only you forgot the shells and the pea.

[Confused]

Definition of an intelligent design:

Something that serves a practical purpose because it is intelligently designed.


Everyday examples of intelligent designs:

Bridges, automobiles, airplanes, computers, igloos, grass huts, bee's nests and honeycombs.

Ok, let me get this straight, you are using the word you are defining to define the word. That is not a definition, that is a purpose, but not definition. One cannot use the word they are defining to define the word anymore than one can use scripture alone to prove the validity of the scriptures reliability.

I'm just talking plain English since the design of something (bridge, house, bee's nest, etc) may be qualified as indicating some intelligent purpose behind it.

As for the validity of the Hebrew scriptures, they are self-evident and self-attesting, in no need of further proof.

I won't debate you on scriptures validity as it is not for this forum, however in your definition for ID, you still haven't defined it. Only given examples of it.

[jcrawford]

Although applied in physics, mathematics is a supernatural function of the human mind, since numbers do not consist of physical matter or forces but are only mentally conceived.

They are human constructs not supernatural functions.

Mental constructs are metaphysical and supernatural since no one can "scientifically" observe them in another person's mind.

We conceive then do to our experiences and imagination.
Both are funtions of our brains and bodies abstracted(mind) from our experiences of the world.

Is this a scientific theory or just personal observations of your own thought processes?

There is nothing outside our experiences.

So much for most of human history, since you were not there to experience any of it before you were born.

This includes the changes in our life forms(evolution). Think of yoursself as a decendent of a single cell organism or less that has been thru maybe billions of years of changes do to copy errors envinonmental factors and the outcome of the survival of your ancesters.

That is beyond your limited realm of experience though, and seems more like a metaphysical or supernatural exercise in fantasy than anything observable in my immediate environment.

You remind me of some spiritualist or palm reader always talking in meaningless riddles to confuse the mark before you take their money.

No one forces spiritualism or palm reading on students in public schools in quite the same way that humanist psychological doctrines are imposed on Christian children in US public schools nowadays.

I keep waiting to hear the voices of spirits only to find that you didn't plug in the recorder. Or maybe playing the shell game only you forgot the shells and the pea.

Spiritualism is as phony as the promises of secular humanism and socialist psychology.

[jcrawford]

I won't debate you on scriptures validity as it is not for this forum, however in your definition for ID, you still haven't defined it. Only given examples of it.

What need is there for a definition of human when you and I are fine examples and speciemen?

Have you never observed the intelligent design of or in anything?

What is your IQ?

[Confused]

I won't debate you on scriptures validity as it is not for this forum, however in your definition for ID, you still haven't defined it. Only given examples of it.

What need is there for a definition of human when you and I are fine examples and speciemen?

Have you never observed the intelligent design of or in anything?

What is your IQ?

Boy we got some loaded question here. Where shall I begin?

1) I never asked for a definition of a human. Only ID. However, I would hope that a definition for human wouldn't be based on the example of you and I alone since you obviously think I am subhuman because I am atheist and I obviously think you are subhuman because you display yourself as stupid (note: not ignorant because this would imply that you just don't know any better, you in fact do know better, you still choose to act stupid).

2) I have witnessed many intelligent minds create many intelligent objects, yes. I have watched many intelligent minds also create some of the worst objects as well. Just as one can create a beautiful song, one can also create the atom bomb. Is there a point to this?

3) My IQ? Obviously it is somewhere along the lines of subhuman in your eyes. But then again: tell me, are you raising 4 children on your own, one of which has autism etc..., another who has chronic myelgenous leukemia? Did you put yourself through college going to school full time, working full time, and still raising one of these 4 children for your Bachelors and 3 of them for your Masters degree? Did you do all this without any help from welfare or charity? (though I have to admit that for my Bachelors degree I did get academic scholarships during my junior and senior years that paid for about half my final two years). I will also admit that my childrens father is still my best friend and lives right next door to me so he has always been there to help. My 18 year old daughter graduates from high school this year, then enters college wanting to do something in linguistics, my 17 year old daughter is in the top 10% of the state of Florida for her grades and qualifies for the academics scholarships and wants to go into the field of biology. My 8 year old daughter maintains all A's despite her relapses of leukemia, and my 7 year old son can do calculus despite his autism. Tell me now of your accomplishments. I am so eager to hear of the accomplisments of one at the human level such as yourself.

[QED]

Your question implies that you can't see the logic in either case. Is that right? please be more specific about the problem you are having here.

I mentally (supernaturally) conceive and cognize the logic indicated by the way the sentences are constructed but I only physically see printed words.

By this it seems pretty obvious to me that you're falling back to your assumption that thought is a supernatural process in order to bypass any need to reason with logic. Such reasoning however (irrespective of it being hosted in a supposedly supernatural way or not) leads me to conclude that knowledge and intelligence can be independently expressed in entirely natural algorithms -- therefore the supernatural element to mentality is once again sufficient but not necessary. This makes your assumption questionable, therefore you are unable to brush-off the issue concerning machine intelligence quite so lightly.

Given that natural algorithms are capable of implementing or simulating (tell me how we are to know the difference between the two?) the application of independent knowledge in an apparently intelligent way, how can we continue to insist that this is something that requires a supernatural component?

Although applied in physics, mathematics is a supernatural function of the human mind, since numbers do not consist of physical matter or forces but are only mentally conceived.

So numbers can only be conceived mentally? That suggests that computers have a degree pf mentality too. I wouldn't be at all surprised.

[Cathar1950]

I remember one IQ test I took and it said I was a gifted child. I was in my 30’s.
My friends still say I am a gifted child.

[Confused]

I remember one IQ test I took and it said I was a gifted child. I was in my 30’s.
My friends still say I am a gifted child.

You will always be a gifted child, it is that medically insignificant Y chromosome that refuses to allow you to grow up. But it is also your most endearing quality, so remain in never never land and one day we shall meet up, though I prefer to be Tink rather than Wendy.

[Cathar1950]

I like Tink the best.

But everyone needs a little mothering so Wendy is special.
I know I mother and like to be mothered but Tink is fun. I do remember reading a book on mothering I think it was called "Mothering". It basically said mothers mother because they were mothered and taught to mother.
Tink is a much better playmate.

I know most women think men never grow up and that may be true. It is much a cultural thing with roots in our species long forgotten. Women do use both sides of their brains more equally. Men usually think of women as girls that never grow up and I hope that is a little true.

I think I might be just a little anti-authoritarian and started with my distrust of adults.
You can imagine my surprise when I became one. They are everywhere.
The big shock was when I realized they were worse then I thought and knew less then they let on. Some times I look and think; “there is some one that really got messed up as a child by some adult who was possible even more messed up by some religious fanatic or drunk parent or parents”. Or some one down the line family got misplaced do to poverty disease or death of family members.


Sorry got side tracked.