07-10-2002, 11:05 AM | #501 | |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Darkness
Posts: 1,211
|
Quote:
There could be a "single" designer- and he could be omniscient- but it would involve a complex explination of time differential and the method used to "produce" the answers needed for omniscience- in other words, we're merely a doodle on a cosmic scratch sheet, where the gods are trying to split the bill for lunch... or the single designer is calculating the tip. Here's a lovely little thought I entertain myself with- suppose the universe is merely a computing device- that uses genetic algorythms, to compute a solution to a problem. In that case, for us, the more important thing to know wouldn't be what is the final solution, but what was the question in the first place? (Shades of Douglas Adams)
__________________
I have harnessed the shadows that stride from world to world to sow death and madness... Queer haow a cravin' gits a holt on ye -- As ye love the Almighty, young man, don't tell nobody, but I swar ter Gawd thet picter begun ta make me hungry fer victuals I couldn't raise nor buy -- here, set still, what's ailin' ye? ... |
|
07-10-2002, 11:14 AM | #502 | |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Darkness
Posts: 1,211
|
Quote:
I'm not speaking about "perfectly designed organisms" Or even for that matter, a single organism per se. I'm talking about process, and use of process for calculation. What, you guys aren't assuming I'm speaking strictly to monotheism are you? Or even a singular deity that is omnipotent and omniscient (which I can argue convincingly are impossible in a metaphysical sense - near omniscience and near omnipotence are a different matter however) If you're really an atheist, as opposed to a anti-(mono)theist, you should have some ready arguments against some of the non conventional views.
__________________
I have harnessed the shadows that stride from world to world to sow death and madness... Queer haow a cravin' gits a holt on ye -- As ye love the Almighty, young man, don't tell nobody, but I swar ter Gawd thet picter begun ta make me hungry fer victuals I couldn't raise nor buy -- here, set still, what's ailin' ye? ... |
|
07-10-2002, 01:12 PM | #503 | |||
Elf Lord of the Grey Havens
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: somewhere else
Posts: 2,381
|
Quote:
Since you haven't really provided any solid framework for discussion I can really only resort to what theist principles currently exist. You may have a secret "designer" in mind but have yet to link it to our existance or evolution or theism. I know it's fun for you to be vague and ambiguous, so go right ahead. In the mean time you shouldn't denigrate my imagination until you reveal your delusions of a single creator to us blind folks. Quote:
Quote:
Now, what was the point of this discussion again? Oh, that's right, it's pointless. In that case, please continue.
__________________
There exists a limit to the force even ther most powerful may apply without destroying themselves. Judging this limit is the true artistry of government. Misuse of power is the fatal sin. The law cannot be a tool of vengance, never a hostage, nor a fortification against the martyrs it has created. You cannot threaten any individual and escape the consequences. -Muad'dib on Law The Stilgar Commentary |
|||
07-10-2002, 02:47 PM | #504 | ||||||||
Elf Lord
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Darkness
Posts: 1,211
|
Quote:
Quote:
I find it odd that you should try to use this as an argument for non-direction. As with any process, directed or non-directed, there are quite often by-products and waste. In other words, I think this point is just poo. Quote:
An unspecified entitiy or entities (since it doesn't really matter for the purposes of discussion) with near omnipotence and omniscience (whether in this created realm or infinity at large and individually or as a group- it doesn't matter for the purposes of discussion) reached an impasse on answering a particular question or point. So they set up a calculation inside a time/space bubble, setting the parameters to particular constants. Whether or not these entities observe, or merely await the outcome, whether or not they have included freewill or predestination, an absolute moral standard, or an afterlife, is totally and completely immaterial to the discussion of intelligent design. The only point I'm particularly interested in, is can evolution (i.e. selection/elimination of non-solutions) be used as a viable computing tool. Well, we both know that it can, and that it is a particularly powerful one. Quote:
As far as I know there's only one theist principal: The belief or acknowledgment of the existence of a God or gods. You wanted a narrow discussion, lets narrow down both ends then. Quote:
Quote:
Your right, I shouldn't denigrate your imagination. I should smack you for trying to weasel. Quote:
*smack* Where in the definition of thiesm does it state that worship is a necessary componant? It isn't. All that is required is the belief or acknowledgement of the exisitence of a diety or dieties (or substitute the word god or gods). Now you should make contrition for thinking up theistic heresies, since you came pretty close to becoming a theist there. Quote:
As for the point of the discussion, I was belaboring under the apprehension that it was about theism. Intelligent design is one possible explination for the existence of the universe (not just life phenomena- since selection/elimination can apply to other things).
__________________
I have harnessed the shadows that stride from world to world to sow death and madness... Queer haow a cravin' gits a holt on ye -- As ye love the Almighty, young man, don't tell nobody, but I swar ter Gawd thet picter begun ta make me hungry fer victuals I couldn't raise nor buy -- here, set still, what's ailin' ye? ... |
||||||||
07-10-2002, 05:28 PM | #505 | |||||||
the Shrike
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: San Francisco, CA <3
Posts: 10,647
|
Can we have an intelligent debate without patronising each other ya big lugs? Now, get to your corners or I'll ... What was I saying again?
Ah yes: intelligent design. Well, as someone once said, show me the money. Since I'm belabouring under my blinkered ideological belief systems, I need to smacked in the head with anything that doesn't fit into my nice tidy box. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Furthermore, if I really wanted to discuss whether or not my flatulence is awaiting the outcome of a particular computation displaying complex divergent functions, then I'd go discuss it on a theist forum... oops.... This talking out of your arse thing is contagious! Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"Binary solo! 0000001! 00000011! 0000001! 00000011!" ~ The Humans are Dead, Flight of the Conchords |
|||||||
07-10-2002, 07:31 PM | #506 | ||
Elf Lord of the Grey Havens
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: somewhere else
Posts: 2,381
|
Yes, we did start to slide down the slippery slop from theism to deism. Once you strip away religion, creative intent, and active involvement, you are left with an indifferent, irrelevant concept of a god or gods that is meaningless. Adding the extra layer of complexity doesn't resolve any of the complaints drummed up about the theory of evolution. It just gives them a name.
"Intelligent design" is just another way of saying speculative conjecture. If I were to speculate about a possible creator, it would be one that is indifferent and unaware, not just of daily occurances, but of the existance of is creation (except maybe the smell). Sand of the beach could be used in a calculation. The question begs whether it is even a vaguely efficient way for a complex deity type organism to balance it's checkbook. Quote:
Quote:
[QUOTE] Can we have an intelligent debate... [QUOTE] No... this is the Internet, after all. On that note, wouldn't it be ironic if the universe was created in the lab of one of the "gods" who was doing research on the possible origins of their existance?
__________________
There exists a limit to the force even ther most powerful may apply without destroying themselves. Judging this limit is the true artistry of government. Misuse of power is the fatal sin. The law cannot be a tool of vengance, never a hostage, nor a fortification against the martyrs it has created. You cannot threaten any individual and escape the consequences. -Muad'dib on Law The Stilgar Commentary |
||
07-11-2002, 12:55 AM | #507 | |
Hoplite Nomad
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 3,931
|
Quote:
I'll make this more clear. again I was asking specifcally for the common refutations to the common ID argument. That's all i was looking for at this moment. A) organism are not perfectly designed b) false analogy c) lesser god, d) pantheon
__________________
About Eowyn, Does anyone know what her alias Dernhelm means? She was kown as dernhelm because of her exclaimation when she realized that the rider's headgear was heavy and obscured her sight. 'Dern Helm" Culled from Entmoot From Kirinski 57 and Wayfarer. |
|
07-11-2002, 01:07 AM | #508 |
Hoplite Nomad
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 3,931
|
ps blackheart the perfectly designed statement had nothing to due with any of your discussions. it was just another thought about comman refutations.
__________________
About Eowyn, Does anyone know what her alias Dernhelm means? She was kown as dernhelm because of her exclaimation when she realized that the rider's headgear was heavy and obscured her sight. 'Dern Helm" Culled from Entmoot From Kirinski 57 and Wayfarer. |
07-11-2002, 01:15 AM | #509 |
Elf Lord of the Grey Havens
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: somewhere else
Posts: 2,381
|
This was an interesting article . Check the last page for the standard refutation of ID.
__________________
There exists a limit to the force even ther most powerful may apply without destroying themselves. Judging this limit is the true artistry of government. Misuse of power is the fatal sin. The law cannot be a tool of vengance, never a hostage, nor a fortification against the martyrs it has created. You cannot threaten any individual and escape the consequences. -Muad'dib on Law The Stilgar Commentary Last edited by Cirdan : 07-11-2002 at 01:17 AM. |
07-11-2002, 01:29 AM | #510 |
Hoplite Nomad
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 3,931
|
thank o great sea lord
__________________
About Eowyn, Does anyone know what her alias Dernhelm means? She was kown as dernhelm because of her exclaimation when she realized that the rider's headgear was heavy and obscured her sight. 'Dern Helm" Culled from Entmoot From Kirinski 57 and Wayfarer. |
07-11-2002, 01:36 AM | #511 | |
Elf Lord of the Grey Havens
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: somewhere else
Posts: 2,381
|
Quote:
__________________
There exists a limit to the force even ther most powerful may apply without destroying themselves. Judging this limit is the true artistry of government. Misuse of power is the fatal sin. The law cannot be a tool of vengance, never a hostage, nor a fortification against the martyrs it has created. You cannot threaten any individual and escape the consequences. -Muad'dib on Law The Stilgar Commentary |
|
07-11-2002, 01:13 PM | #512 | |||||
Elf Lord
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Darkness
Posts: 1,211
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
What's wrong with simplistic? I hear people complain about all these wild flights of fancy, adding in extra reasons and unnecessesary complications, and yet here you go and try to bag me for being simplistic? As far as I'm concerned simple is good. However, you're going to have to get a little more explicit on your complaint about cause and effect and binary systems. As far as I know, the universe doesn't operate on a binary system. Quantum fluctuations are of a higher order, and with the spin, charm, charge etc allow for a much more complex system than binary. Quote:
Quote:
__________________
I have harnessed the shadows that stride from world to world to sow death and madness... Queer haow a cravin' gits a holt on ye -- As ye love the Almighty, young man, don't tell nobody, but I swar ter Gawd thet picter begun ta make me hungry fer victuals I couldn't raise nor buy -- here, set still, what's ailin' ye? ... |
|||||
07-11-2002, 01:59 PM | #513 | ||||||
Elf Lord
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Darkness
Posts: 1,211
|
Quote:
It is however irrelevant to the discussion of the core possibility of intelligent design. You could as easily postulate that the universe is a sim game, or a hanging sculpture. I chose calculation because it's an interesting possibility with entertaining ramifications. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
We do however know that using genetic algorythm calculations is a very efficient way to calculate certain types of solutions. The matrix used again isn't the point. If we use a computer, or a bio-incubater, we're still using the same method. So no, I disagree that it begs the question. Questions as to the efficiency of a particular type of matrix cannot be effectively formulated until we know more about the type of matrix in quesiton. If it happens to be the known universe, then we certainly don't know enough about the operation of time and space outside our own little bubble (not to mention INSIDE the bubble) to evaluate the efficiency of such a method. Quote:
As to having a god with no defining principles, I disagree that it is of no consequence. The primary fact that such an entity exists opens up an entire host of questions, not to mention it calls into question many assumptions that we make about the physical universe. To say that such is nada, sounds at the least, a bit pollyannish. As for capitolization, it is a convention. I could have capitolized Gods also. If you read any meaning into it, it is your own bias, as no such meaning is intended. I could just as easily written Azathoth, the blind, insane, idiot, unsensing god of Lovecraft's mythos that created the physical universe in an involuntary act. And yet, you'd tell me that the discovery of such an entity would be basically meaningless and without implication for humanity? Quote:
__________________
I have harnessed the shadows that stride from world to world to sow death and madness... Queer haow a cravin' gits a holt on ye -- As ye love the Almighty, young man, don't tell nobody, but I swar ter Gawd thet picter begun ta make me hungry fer victuals I couldn't raise nor buy -- here, set still, what's ailin' ye? ... |
||||||
07-11-2002, 02:17 PM | #514 | |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Darkness
Posts: 1,211
|
Quote:
Very few people on either side treat the idea with the merit or consideration it deserves, which irks me. I'm afraid you'll get no common ID arguments from me, as I regard them as deeply flawed, due to the bias inherant in the argument. Make no mistake, ID is a metaphysical construct, and as such is not (currently) amenable to empirical disproof. There are however interesting question that are raised from investigating the possibilities. I find the most interesting, cogent, coherant, and entertaining of these possibilities, to be one that views the known universe to be a grand calculating matrix. I
__________________
I have harnessed the shadows that stride from world to world to sow death and madness... Queer haow a cravin' gits a holt on ye -- As ye love the Almighty, young man, don't tell nobody, but I swar ter Gawd thet picter begun ta make me hungry fer victuals I couldn't raise nor buy -- here, set still, what's ailin' ye? ... |
|
07-11-2002, 08:54 PM | #515 | ||||
Elf Lord of the Grey Havens
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: somewhere else
Posts: 2,381
|
Quote:
since the concept, even in it's basic premise, is flawed. The conclusion is also the premise; the route to get there is any "unknowable purpose" one can postulate. Maybe if you gave some references to sources more unbiased than I've been able to find, I would be less dubious. As you've pointed out, the sources of ID are ineviatbly creationists. [QUOTE][B]One, it answers several fundamental metaphysical question. "Why are we here?" "What are we supposed to be doing?" etc. It may in a stretch, be an explanation, albeit weak, of how we came to be here. What we are supposed to be doing... not even close. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I have no objection to straying off topic since the difference between the two terms, while significant, are not at all incompatible, but we should be clear about which we are discussing. Is it a god that creates the universe as a coscious effort, with the intent of creating life forms and actively be involved in the lives of the beings (theism), or is it and indifferent creator unaware of the "by-product" of conscious beings. You are amusing, BH. The "pollyanna" adjective more aptly describes ID better than any statement I've made. Still, I suppose it could be fun to hypothesize about what the function of the universe might be. It beats dissecting the Old Testament, but not by much.
__________________
There exists a limit to the force even ther most powerful may apply without destroying themselves. Judging this limit is the true artistry of government. Misuse of power is the fatal sin. The law cannot be a tool of vengance, never a hostage, nor a fortification against the martyrs it has created. You cannot threaten any individual and escape the consequences. -Muad'dib on Law The Stilgar Commentary |
||||
07-12-2002, 02:51 PM | #516 | ||||||||||
Elf Lord
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Darkness
Posts: 1,211
|
Quote:
I don't think it tries to be on both sides of the fence at all. I think it objects to the fence as a point of seperation. As for the conclusion being the premise, that might be an objection if it were an empirical statement, however that's not necesarily a problem in a metaphysical postulate, since it would be an apriori statement. Of course there is no way to prove it. The interesting part is what questions does it raise? How does it conflict with what we know.? As for the sources of ID being invariably creationist, no. The idea has been around for quite a while, (even in Sci-fi) but it has been tainted, perhaps irrevocably, by individuals with a creationist agenda. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
There are plenty of other examples of highly speculative ideas being supported by evidence, once the evidence was found. They were alos denigrated as baseless, speculative, wild, erroneous, insane conjecture, and utter hogwash. In many instances, no one would have been looking for the evidence, had not there been some odd concept clicking around in the grand conciousness. Plate tectonics is another fine example. I don't even feel like listing them, you can easily find your own examples. Quote:
Thiesm is listed most often as the doctrine or belief in the existence of a god or gods. It makes absolutely NO reference to revelation or interaction. Deism is listed most often as the doctrine or creed of a deist; the belief or system of those who acknowledge the existence of a god (or gods), but deny revelation. (in other words, no communication, or interaction) As far as I can reasonably assertain theism is an overarching class, and deism is a subclass of theism. Hence discussion of deism is quite acceptable in the topic of theism, since it is a form of theism. Yor objection still makes no sense to me. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
I have harnessed the shadows that stride from world to world to sow death and madness... Queer haow a cravin' gits a holt on ye -- As ye love the Almighty, young man, don't tell nobody, but I swar ter Gawd thet picter begun ta make me hungry fer victuals I couldn't raise nor buy -- here, set still, what's ailin' ye? ... Last edited by Blackheart : 07-12-2002 at 03:07 PM. |
||||||||||
07-12-2002, 09:50 PM | #517 | |
Elf Lord of the Grey Havens
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: somewhere else
Posts: 2,381
|
Don't try and bend the fence. That's impossible. You must realize there is no fence
I'm not impressed with your academic whacking prowess. A simple concept that choosing not to decide is still a decision is apparently lost here. You once posted that you accept ideas that are useful. I find not use in metaphyscial postulations that the universe is a machine any more useful than a statement that a rock is a very slow moving form of life. That I don't as the same questions you do, does not mean I don't question, so save your anti-intellectual insults for your rigid academic whackees. Theories of gravity and based on gravity are NOT baseless. Gravity if a fairly tangible experience, no? Extraplolating on a empircal concept to a step-wise conculsion is a bit different than saying gravity is a trash compactor for a supra-universal being. Plate Tectonics is based on observable natural phenomena as well. Empirical, tangible and verifiable. What others may say about their contemporaries as to the validity of the findings is not relevant to our discussion. These were not metaphysical hypotheses or pure postulation. It was someone finding the words, the equations, or putting seemingly disparate facts together to form a new concept. An example of baseless theories is the creationist concept of the crust of the earth floating on a layer of water and then breaking to create the biblical flood. Working from the answer backwards to the theory in order to get the desired answer. We did start a discussion on ID as it relates to Evolution, Now your not interested. Fine. Best to be a moving target. Universal evolution? I have no ridgid thoughts on this at all. In fact, I think we have discovered more questions than answers, as facinating as the answers maybe be. You don't like the word conclusion. Can I substitute "hypothetical conclusion?" "If directed design then...." as you yourself have posted previously. To postulate requires proposing some potential truth or conclusion, even though the assumptions are not based in fact. Quote:
I agree that deism is a form of theism. My source of definitions is "Webster's Encylcopedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language" (1996). The use of The term "theism" is primarily defined, and commonly used, as the belief in God. The secondary and more general definition is the definition you have been using (god or gods). Piddling difference, but if piddling is in order... We can even discuss polytheism if you want. Whoa, you really don't like Edison! Does he remind you a bit of a man named Bill? Anyway, if you get your hackles down and want to discuss the calculation device hypothesis and how it might work in relation to what we know, okay. If you just want to point out that it is conceivable, I guess we're done with ID.
__________________
There exists a limit to the force even ther most powerful may apply without destroying themselves. Judging this limit is the true artistry of government. Misuse of power is the fatal sin. The law cannot be a tool of vengance, never a hostage, nor a fortification against the martyrs it has created. You cannot threaten any individual and escape the consequences. -Muad'dib on Law The Stilgar Commentary |
|
07-16-2002, 02:40 PM | #518 | |||||||||||||
Elf Lord
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Darkness
Posts: 1,211
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
That however doesn't mean that you can't take a question formulated from a view of design, such as the possibility of a working evolutionary calculating device, and submit it to empirical tests. Quote:
Quote:
Now when you start asking questions like why it's built into the matrix, then you are dealing with metaphysics. But answers dealing with the capabilities of evolutionary functions in different processes, i.e. what they can be used for, are empirical. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I don't particularly care what form of theism is being discussed, since the broader term covers them all. Quote:
Quote:
As for how it might work in relation to what we know, well that's not a difficult task. We already know that it works well for many questions where there are a wide range of possible solutions. It's used all the time for such calculations.
__________________
I have harnessed the shadows that stride from world to world to sow death and madness... Queer haow a cravin' gits a holt on ye -- As ye love the Almighty, young man, don't tell nobody, but I swar ter Gawd thet picter begun ta make me hungry fer victuals I couldn't raise nor buy -- here, set still, what's ailin' ye? ... |
|||||||||||||
07-17-2002, 03:51 AM | #519 | |
Hoplite Nomad
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 3,931
|
Quote:
Ps do/did you and that dark elf poster ( mord-something) at ME Vault ever get into a verbal war it would have been great to read
__________________
About Eowyn, Does anyone know what her alias Dernhelm means? She was kown as dernhelm because of her exclaimation when she realized that the rider's headgear was heavy and obscured her sight. 'Dern Helm" Culled from Entmoot From Kirinski 57 and Wayfarer. |
|
07-17-2002, 09:41 AM | #520 |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Darkness
Posts: 1,211
|
No, Morty and I never really got into a full "discussion", which is just as well. I'm not sure the snoball servers would have made it.
__________________
I have harnessed the shadows that stride from world to world to sow death and madness... Queer haow a cravin' gits a holt on ye -- As ye love the Almighty, young man, don't tell nobody, but I swar ter Gawd thet picter begun ta make me hungry fer victuals I couldn't raise nor buy -- here, set still, what's ailin' ye? ... |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
REAL debate thread for RELIGION | Ruinel | General Messages | 1439 | 04-01-2005 02:47 PM |