Page 7 of 70 FirstFirst ... 567891757 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 698

Thread: Watchmaker Argument - Discussion

  1. #61
    Sage

    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:18 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    15,383

    Re: Data, data, data

    Quote Originally Posted by Elvira View Post
    It most certainly does make sense, in fact, it is the only explanation that makes sense...

    "Of course, every house is constructed by someone, but the one who constructed all things is God." Hebrews 3:4
    And we're back to special pleading, thus making the premise false, and the argument unsound.
    Supporting Trump, but claiming you are against racism...is like eating a Banana Split every day, but claiming you are against ice cream.

  2. #62
    Maquis Admiral
    maquiscat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    10,719

    Re: Watchmaker Argument - Discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by Dragonfly View Post
    So when it's proposed that our Universe does not require a creator, doesn't that response support such a proposal?

    Isn't that exactly what defeats the "Watchmaker Argument"?
    The argument is based on premises which may or may not be true. Right now there is no evidence to definitely conclude one way or the other. ALL premises on this issue stem from subjective ideas that cannot be proven. The "Watchmaker Argument" can neither be defeated nor defeat.

    Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk
    Bi, Poly, Switch. I'm not indecisive, I'm greedy!

    My leaving the conversation does not indicate you won. It means that real life took priority, or I have just tired of your idiocy.

  3. #63
    ThunderCougarFalconBird
    roughdraft274's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    14,948
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Watchmaker Argument - Discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by Dragonfly View Post
    Watchmaker analogy - Wikipedia

    Or: Teleological argument - Wikipedia

    So let's boil it down to the simplest form for the discussion. At least to start.

    The concept is rather clear:



    That which is complex, requires a design, which obviously implies something designed it.

    A watch doesn't exist without a designer.
    Therefore the Universe couldn't exist without a designer.

    First question right from the gate, if you presume the concept has merit, that a design implies a designer, why then jump to the conclusion (in the case of the universe/life as we know it) that the designer must be one specific "god"? Or any "god"/"gods" at all?

    Does the watchmaker analogy (in terms of God/universe/life) hold water, or fall apart rather quickly?
    A design does imply a designer.

    The watch maker argument is the story that if you are walking along a beach where there is no sign of human involvement, just a completely natural setting, and you saw a watch, you could tell it was designed. Which I think is a terrible argument for a god. The watch looks designed when you see it against the back drop of nature. If nature were designed, then the watch wouldn't stand out.

    And if we look at the universe we have stars exploding and a whole lot of really terrible design. To say that it shows some amazing complex designer is laughable. If you just narrow it down to our own planet you have a world in a delicate balance where much of the world can't sustain human life, an abundance of salt water and numerous areas that lack drinkable water etc.

    Give me god like powers and knowledge and I could improve the world drastically for nearly every single person in 5 minutes.
    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    uh that is so small as to be stupid. Do you want registration? given less than 3% of criminals get their guns from private sales, its pretty much a waste of resources
    **Thirty Minutes Later**
    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    you are confused. I never denied that many criminals get guns in private sales.

  4. #64
    Sage
    Dragonfly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    East Coast - USA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:04 PM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    20,782

    Re: Watchmaker Argument - Discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by Overitall View Post
    What if we call God, The Big Bang. Would special pleading still apply?
    What if there are Multi-Verses?

    What if a group of "Einsteins" and "Hawkings" in another Universe created our Universe as an experiment?

    Would those alien Einstein's and Hawking's be "gods"?

  5. #65
    Maquis Admiral
    maquiscat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    10,719

    Re: Data, data, data

    Quote Originally Posted by southwest88 View Post
    ... with better designs (to call them that, but it's not clear that there's a designer present, overseeing the processes) ...
    I think this is part of the problem. We tend to use the word design to attribute to structure, but it leaves an implication that might not be true.

    Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk
    Bi, Poly, Switch. I'm not indecisive, I'm greedy!

    My leaving the conversation does not indicate you won. It means that real life took priority, or I have just tired of your idiocy.

  6. #66
    Maquis Admiral
    maquiscat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    10,719

    Re: Watchmaker Argument - Discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by bluesmoke View Post
    Therefore that the universe couldn't exist without a designer/creator, implying a supernatural being like God, is a false premise but for mere imagination of the possibility.
    The problem is that many who point out this false premise then go on to claim a premise that a designe/creator cannot exist. Also a false premise. Or more to point neither premise can be proven.

    Lastly, in the case of at least the Christian faith, there is not only no real depth of understanding God, there is no questioning, either. Real faith does not go down the road of the need for any science of any kind, quasi or not, in an attempt to explain our existence other than to have faith in God being all that is necessary. To go down that road is to question God and faith and thus not have faith.
    I disagree. Personally, while I have my belief, it is based upon my personal experience. Events that evidence to me that my belief has foundation. Furthermore, I constantly question the basis, and even the details of my faith. The majority of people of faith (not just Christian) do so also, in my experience. Science explains how the universe works, and does not one thing to show (currently at any rate) how the workings were put into place. Science and religious faith are not incompatible.

    Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk
    Bi, Poly, Switch. I'm not indecisive, I'm greedy!

    My leaving the conversation does not indicate you won. It means that real life took priority, or I have just tired of your idiocy.

  7. #67
    Professor
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:18 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,909

    Re: Watchmaker Argument - Discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by Dragonfly View Post
    Watchmaker analogy - Wikipedia

    Or: Teleological argument - Wikipedia

    So let's boil it down to the simplest form for the discussion. At least to start.

    The concept is rather clear:



    That which is complex, requires a design, which obviously implies something designed it.

    A watch doesn't exist without a designer.
    Therefore the Universe couldn't exist without a designer.

    First question right from the gate, if you presume the concept has merit, that a design implies a designer, why then jump to the conclusion (in the case of the universe/life as we know it) that the designer must be one specific "god"? Or any "god"/"gods" at all?

    Does the watchmaker analogy (in terms of God/universe/life) hold water, or fall apart rather quickly?
    There are several reasons it falls apart quickly.

    The statement "a design implies a designer" is circular. A design implies a designer by definition because a design IS something that was created by a designer.

    It is also a non sequitur (or maybe a red herring) to the extent of what it is actually meant to demonstrate, because the unstated premise is that nature appears to be designed. To the contrary, there's nothing about nature that resembles any kind of actual design, except to the extent that actual designs have copied structures in nature (directly or by necessity).

    And it suffers from the problem of infinite regress, which is painfully obvious in the analogy itself. To wit: the analogy is meant to demonstrate that human life was designed by some other intelligence. To do this, the analogy likens the "other intelligence" to a "watchmaker," which in reality is a human life. So who designed the watchmaker? And so on.

    Finally, it ignores the fact that we have actual evidence that watches are designed by people. We can observe people designing and building watches right now. We have no corresponding evidence whatsoever with respect to the universe or life on earth.

  8. #68
    Sage

    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:18 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    15,383

    Re: Watchmaker Argument - Discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by maquiscat View Post
    The argument is based on premises which may or may not be true. Right now there is no evidence to definitely conclude one way or the other. ALL premises on this issue stem from subjective ideas that cannot be proven. The "Watchmaker Argument" can neither be defeated nor defeat.
    That is where you are wrong. If you can't prove the premises, the argument is defeated. Otherwise you have to accept the Purple Unicorn theory of creation:

    1. Undetectable Purple Unicorns circle the moon.

    2. If something is undetectable and purple, it created the universe.

    Therefore Undetectable Purple Unicorns created the universe.
    Supporting Trump, but claiming you are against racism...is like eating a Banana Split every day, but claiming you are against ice cream.

  9. #69
    Maquis Admiral
    maquiscat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    10,719

    Re: Watchmaker Argument - Discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by roughdraft274 View Post
    A design does imply a designer.
    While true in and of itself, that doesn't mean we will not use the word on things that were not actually designed.

    The watch maker argument is the story that if you are walking along a beach where there is no sign of human involvement, just a completely natural setting, and you saw a watch, you could tell it was designed. Which I think is a terrible argument for a god. The watch looks designed when you see it against the back drop of nature. If nature were designed, then the watch wouldn't stand out.
    There is a fault to this logic. Many plants and animals around out in their backgrounds, or even more so outside their backgrounds of origin. A polar bear would stand out in the woods. Seeing the watch outside its natural context, doesn't mean there isn't a source where you would see hundreds of watch naturally growing.

    And if we look at the universe we have stars exploding and a whole lot of really terrible design. To say that it shows some amazing complex designer is laughable. If you just narrow it down to our own planet you have a world in a delicate balance where much of the world can't sustain human life, an abundance of salt water and numerous areas that lack drinkable water etc.

    Give me god like powers and knowledge and I could improve the world drastically for nearly every single person in 5 minutes.
    That is subjective opinion. What you think is ideal isn't someone else's. Why should things last forever? If you are creating creatures who can reproduce, why would you not include population controls, such as diseases and limited habitats?

    Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk
    Bi, Poly, Switch. I'm not indecisive, I'm greedy!

    My leaving the conversation does not indicate you won. It means that real life took priority, or I have just tired of your idiocy.

  10. #70
    Sage

    RAMOSS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    41,087

    Re: Watchmaker Argument - Discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by Josie View Post
    If not a "god," what/who else would be a "designer"? The word implies an intelligent, thinking entity.
    There is also 'emergent properties caused by complex interactions applied by a probability filter'. That gives the illusion of being a designer, without there actually being a designer.
    No one needs a war more than a politician who is being impeached

Page 7 of 70 FirstFirst ... 567891757 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •