Didn't Darwin make Teleological obsolete?

<< < (15/16) > >>

Hermes (September 26, 2010, 15:30:14 PM):
What I am arguing is that a god that performed genetic modification would (albeit in a limited sense) be performing "intelligent design". You say that it could be done in a manner that would appear consistent with the exhibition of evolutionary heritage. Mefiante claims that ID would necessarily involve genes that do not display evolutionary heritage. I suspect that the requirement for ID, as espoused by its proponents, might require more than rudimentary GM.
Julian (September 26, 2010, 15:50:18 PM):
What I am arguing is that a god that performed genetic modification would (albeit in a limited sense) be performing "intelligent design".
Yes I agree.

Quote
You say that it could be done in a manner that would appear consistent with the exhibition of evolutionary heritage.
Yes, if we agree for the sake of argument that the god under discussion is all powerful and can do anything.

Quote
Mefiante claims that ID would necessarily involve genes that do not display evolutionary heritage. I suspect that the requirement for ID, as espoused by its proponents, might require more than rudimentary GM.
Perhaps if Mefiante is referring to particular arguments put forward by these ID proponents (Discovery Institute perhaps), these can be refuted by the observed lack of genes without evolutionary heritage. But in theory, a general argument for ID would not necessarily be refuted by this absence, since an intelligent designer could always give his designed genes the appearance of an evolutionary heritage.

Hermes (September 26, 2010, 16:27:47 PM):
Quote
You say that it could be done in a manner that would appear consistent with the exhibition of evolutionary heritage.
Yes, if we agree for the sake of argument that the god under discussion is all powerful and can do anything.
I do not see your previous stance requiring any supernatural powers. If humans can modify a genome in a way that is not detectable later, why would gods require supernatural qualities to do so?
Quote
Perhaps if Mefiante is referring to particular arguments put forward by these ID proponents (Discovery Institute perhaps), these can be refuted by the observed lack of genes without evolutionary heritage. But in theory, a general argument for ID would not necessarily be refuted by this absence, since an intelligent designer could always give his designed genes the appearance of an evolutionary heritage.
Agreed, if we introduce Thursdayism into it, an IDiot could use that argument.

One of the most popular ID arguments is the one of irreducible complexity. To genetically modify a life form to the extent that a complex organ is introduced would probably require a level of genetic manipulation that would be easily detectable later. I will leave this to more knowledgeable members rather than to speculate.
Mefiante (September 26, 2010, 19:48:08 PM):
[A] general argument for ID would not necessarily be refuted by [an absence of genes showing an evolutionary heritage], since an intelligent designer could always give his designed genes the appearance of an evolutionary heritage.
Yes, indeed s/he could. However, in that case, we hardly have any reason at all to take seriously the hypothesis that “certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.” That is, IDiocy would be sliced to shreds by Occam’s Razor and also die a lonely death, wholly deprived of any supportive evidence, simply because we have a simpler and better explanation already that makes fewer and enormously less demanding assumptions. Of course, if you take a supernatural creator god as a given, then the opposite is true.

At this point, it should be obvious just how tricky this science thing can get… ::)

'Luthon64
Julian (September 26, 2010, 20:38:21 PM):
I do not see your previous stance requiring any supernatural powers. If humans can modify a genome in a way that is not detectable later, why would gods require supernatural qualities to do so?
Good point, they wouldn't. However if they wanted to produce significant and undetectable changes, they would require abilities far greater than our own.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Skeptic Forum Board Index

Non-mobile version of page