Intelligent Design

Discussion in 'Religion' started by Xelasnave.1947, Sep 11, 2018.

  1. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    26,927
    And since you don't, the first holds.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Musika Last in Space Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,917
    Is there a reference to the bill and my description?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Gawdzilla Sama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,818
    "Questioning Darwin", a PBS NOVA program IIRC, show a gentleman saying that if the Bible said 2 + 2 = 5 he would accept that without question and try to make his world work under that rule.

    In other words, they have to change, you can't change them.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,784
    Question begging has a habit of doing that.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    As to your other point above, re: distinction between how? and why? I do agree, although unless your "how?" includes means of establishing the "why?" I'm not sure how one can establish the "why?" or indeed if there is one at all.
     
  8. Musika Last in Space Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,917
    It was more that "how's" are the stomping ground of science. So the ways and means of arriving at a "why" answer (as per ID) is dubious.
     
  9. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,914
    Well I dont like to say this but I dont take it to a level of definition.
    Alex
     
  10. Musika Last in Space Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,917
    Then you also don't take it to a level of argument .... which doesn't seem to be the case.
     
  11. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,914
    You are probably right.

    Perhaps I will leave it to you for any definitions.. you are in the game and know the history phillosophy etc so if you want to define it I am sure your input would be informative.

    Certainly if I cant define anything and believe the case has not been established for the theist position I really need not argue..I dont know why I get involved in these threads other than I like everyone in the place and so I step back and think its all very interesting and happy that the world us working at all...I dont need spirituality but I appreciate its contribution to humanity and terrible things happen and good things happen ..life.
    Alex
     
  12. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,113
    this comment makes me curious, why you would object to the idea of being part of evolution(be it from a single cell or multi cell thing etc)... ?
    probably an entirely differtent thread topic though.

    intelligent design
    the fibonacci sequence suggests something quite formulated to a function of mathamatics.
    though as some member mentioned (i forget who) if for example, life is formed through trillions of equations of possible outcomes then the process of winding back into those occurances becomes a mathamatics equation.
    is that mathamatics equation a law ?
    hhmmm...

    when it comes to intelligent design of humans, i am on the fence.
    when it comes to intelligent design of trees fungi bacteria etc.. i am on the fence.
    i tend toward darwinian evolution as a mechanism.
    however, unravelling your question leaves little room than to ask if you refer to biological life.

    could biological life have been designed ? well.. we see genetic engineering in various things. we also see how we cant possibly duplicate many things.
    parts of the human psyche wish to simplify and comprehend things that seem complex while also giving a reasonable amount of trust to feel at ease with certain aspects.
    Religion as a form of that is logical.
    intelligent desgn as a beleif is logical.
    logical to human minds
    maybe not real, but very logical to human existance.

    i hope i have not derailed the thread or killed it.
     
  13. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,914
    I dont object I was stirring☺
    I have heard theists get all upset and insulted by the suggestion their ancestors were apes.
    I dint think so thanks for your input.
    Alex
     
    RainbowSingularity likes this.
  14. Michael 345 Bali in Nov closer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,229
    In their logic world then they don't have a problem coming from mud or clay

    And of course we can go down the rabbit hole

    Man made in the image of god

    So he had the template for male

    ???? where did template for the female originate

    And man made in the image of god so where did the god template come from? as per who designed god and for what purpose all the bits used for? as per god needs to eat so needs a stomach?

    That's enough for someone who was not going to butt in until post 200

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Sep 15, 2018
  15. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,345
    This is rubbish as I suspect you know perfectly well. Some religious sects get upset by it. What is rather insulting is to tar all "theists" with the same brush and accuse them of rejecting basic science.
     
  16. Gawdzilla Sama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,818
    I was watching "Questioning Darwin" (PBS) the other day and a preacherman said that if he found in the Bible a statement that 2 + 2 = 5 he would accept that and try to make his world work based on that information.

    If you accept all the current science and STILL believe in a god or gods then you're not far from that man.
     
    Michael 345 likes this.
  17. Michael 345 Bali in Nov closer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,229
    You may be correct in that only

    Some religious sects get upset by it.

    and What is rather insulting is to tar all "theists" with the same brush

    I don't see as insulting except for snowflake theist

    However believing in Sky Daddy does give a massive indication the believers reject basic science

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  18. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,914
    Yes you are right.
    No doubt only a small proportion.

    Alex
     
  19. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    26,927
    While "not all theists" is quite true, in point of fact the proportion of religious theists that reject basic science in some respect at least is not only very large but politically very significant - in the US and many other extensive and important populations on the planet, it's dominant.
     
  20. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,113
    and have been brainwashed by a patriarchal cult that rate women as a second class entity.

    how many americans over the age of 20 can list 10 of the capital citys in the world ?

    how many can locate jerusalem, israel & saudi arabia on the globe ?

    2% ?
     
  21. Michael 345 Bali in Nov closer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,229
    But they might know about the 60+ gender versions you can attribute to yourself and be offended if not addressed correctly

    Obviously much more important

    Male (approx 49%) - Female (approx 49%) - Mixed (approx 2%)

    The above so yesterday

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  22. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,113
    you said the magic word to a conservative religous morality
    "sex"
    dirty heathen copulation like animals or pure godly love making of inception of the heavenly souls...
    its hardly a level playing field
     

Share This Page