Quote:
Originally Posted by saxinc++  Now, I didn't say that. I can toss 5 dice into the air, have them show 1-6 on their upper face, and have them all in a small circle. (order on this scale) They weren't designed like that. (yes, they were designed, but I'm talking about the way that they are; their current state of existence--that certainly doesn't imply design). In that case, you would be right.
However, when you throw "highly complicated" into it, you change it entirely. While the dice could all be scattered around and show each number, do you honestly believe they could stack up perfectly, with all of the numbers lined up? (highly-complicated on this scale). And the universe is so much more! How can you say the universe, being highly-complicated isn't designed, but it would be nearly impossible for the dice scenario to happen?
So, while order doesn't necessarily imply design, order and high-complication points strongly to it. |
These are not analogous situations. You assume quite a bit in making that analogy and the followed assumption. Looking at the universe around you yields high complication and order only if you assume that we are actually, "ordered" and not "random". Now, there is no truly random in the universe-- as we are slowly learning, all interactions are governed by certain laws and forces which lead to predictable outcomes. The world around you is only as complex and ordered as our frame of reference. Understanding that our own universe is so big that trillions of trillions of trillions of possibilities exist within it, and that those trillions of trillions of trillions of planets and stars and worlds which are created based upon these fundamental laws have a certain number of "options" based upon these fundamental laws as paths they can go down, and once certain events lead them down those paths there are only certain paths to go down, etc etc.
The universe is so tremendous that many of the possible worlds to construct are in fact constructed somewhere. In fact, many estimates predict that life exists and has spontaneously (for all intents and purposes) developed in as many as millions of worlds.
We are only so unique and so special that our outcome can be considered one that requires design if we are actually that unique and special. Everything that science and philosophy has taken into account in the modern age suggests that this is anything but the truth.
One must remember that order on a small scale happens in small scenarios. However, order on a tremendous scale such as the universe can happen on equally tremendous scales and NOT be unlikely, or even special enough to enter the point of, "needing" a designer.
There is no reason to look out amongst ourselves and suggest we need design other than a lack of understanding of the universe, probability, and how to scale probability to universal proportions, or just plain human exceptionalism without any real motivation for that. We're not anywhere near the "special case" that you're making us out to be.
As for the other philosophical argument in this thread, I'll be more prepared ot make it in a few days when I can go back and do my reading on some of these issues. Unfortunately, the other person I'm arguing with seems not to have investigated much of the last 200 years of philosophy pertaining to God (Kant, Hume, etc) and I'm going to have to make a better argument to convince him, if I can convince him.