While it's true that there are a large number of examples in both camps, what makes the argument to intelligent design so strong is that we know based on what we've observed, that we only get artifacts that display the properties of premise one in this way. — Sam26
I don't understand? How is it that a cat doesn't have parts, e.g., legs, heart, lung, liver, etc. that work together to achieve higher order functions than any single part alone, and the same can be shown with the tree. — Sam26
Actually, there may be something - not in all objects of nature, but specifically in biological organisms - that exhibits such a teleological structure. It is hard not to notice how naturally we think in terms of functions when we think about organisms, both from the perspective of their present-day structure and behavior and from the perspective of their evolutionary development. Indeed, this has been noted both by theoretical biologists and by philosophers (Ruth Millikan being particularly notable among the latter). I refer you to this short SEP article: Teleological Notions in Biology. — SophistiCat
Yes. The lesson from the failure of various attempts to come up with a set of narrow criteria that define design - criteria that apply just to the product of design (complexity and such) - is that design properties must be broad: they must encompass not just the thing that is designed but, essentially, the designer as well. — SophistiCat
You should worry more about too many apostrophes ;) — SophistiCat
Evolution is not random, it selects from favourable attributes and rejects those which are unfavourable. — Pseudonym
Whether the purpose is survival, or conformity to a sexually selected morphology is immaterial to the argument. — Pseudonym
Evolution literally means "to roll out of." — Jon
↪Jon Stop rolling out your turd, and find out what it really means. — charleton
If there is no force opposing entropy why is heat death so far off and only a theory at that? Why do we see evolutionary convergence? Why after each mass extinction does life return more complex, more experiential and more intelligent forms re-emerge? — prothero
Whether the purpose is survival, or conformity to a sexually selected morphology is immaterial to the argument. — Pseudonym
At the same time one should at cosmology as an evolutionary process and at the self-organizing patterns of nature (from a Platonic or final causes perspective). — prothero
Indeed NOT.The accidental purposeless universe crowd has more to explain than they like to admit. — prothero
I think one could consider whether evolution itself is part of the "design". The "purpose" being not the creation of any particular form or species but instead creativity itself "forms wondrous and beautiful". At the same time one should at cosmology as an evolutionary process and at the self-organizing patterns of nature (from a Platonic or final causes perspective). — prothero
I don't think you're looking for the actual meaning of the word evolution but rather it's common usage which is partly defined as "the gradual development of something, especially from a simple to a more complex form."
— Jon
Etymological and semantic arguments are not relevant here. — charleton
Since you don't like any of my answers why don't you tell me what evolution means literally? — Jon
YOU SAID
Whether the purpose is survival, or conformity to a sexually selected morphology is immaterial to the argument.
I disagree for the reasons I said. — charleton
So you think it is material to the argument whether a person sees the illusion of purpose as survival, or whether they see it as morphological conformity? Id really like to know how. — Pseudonym
I just can't believe that cells made of particles somehow just randomly created entire biological systems. Particles of metal don't randomly organize themselves into rockets. Intelligent intervention is needed to shape inanimate or non-thinking materials into purposeful forms. — CasKev
The way carbon bonds to itself (and other elements) allows the millions of unique molecules which no other element has the capacity to form. — Moliere
As I said , it is of no importance the LITERAL meaning of evolution.
In the context of the thread we are interested in the entire body of theory which points to the apparent design through automatically, rather than intelligently guided development.
This is not a lesson in the origin of words, but the origin of species.
The literal meaning gives a completely false view point.
When you unroll a scroll you are revealing what is preordained by the fact that the text is already written. Evolution is about the way species respond from changes in the environment via variation and mutation to produce novel adaptations and new species.
If they were LITERALLY evolving they would just be showing us what was already intended, as by God for instance. — charleton
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.