Welcome to Atheist Discussion, a new community created by former members of The Thinking Atheist forum.

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Chance or Design
#1

Chance or Design
The definition of "Chance" from Oxford Languages, in the form of it's use in this thread.

"the occurrence and development of events in the absence of any obvious design."

Evolution has no "obvious designer" therefore it is by "chance." Regardless of what any scientist with his extreme knowledge may say, This is the reason I'll not pursue their theories, it's a total failure on the part of common sense.

It is impossible for this complex universe we live in to be by a chance occurrence as they have laid it out.

How is it possible that an intelligent person can believe this? I have my own theories on that, but would like to hear from you on the matter. If anyone is interested..   
Reply
#2

Chance or Design
Design is not the same as designer. The process of evolution could be said to be dictated/designed by the laws of physics (gravity, the strong and weak nuclear forces etc). Dawkins has said specifically that the process of biological evolution is the very opposite of chance, it is natural selection, governed by survival of the fittest and the laws of physics/nature.
The following 3 users Like Dexta's post:
  • Alan V, Aegon, Chas
Reply
#3

Chance or Design
(01-03-2024, 08:52 PM)Charlie24 Wrote: Regardless of what any scientist with his extreme knowledge may say, This is the reason I'll not pursue their theories, it's a total failure on the part of common sense.

So the fact that you cannot comprehend what others who have given serious study toward comprehending can only mean that they're idiots.

Facepalm

You will never be taken seriously, Charlie24, until you yourself are able to take others seriously.
The following 2 users Like airportkid's post:
  • Chas, isbelldl
Reply
#4

Chance or Design
(01-03-2024, 08:59 PM)Dexta Wrote: Design is not the same as designer. The process of evolution could be said to be dictated/designed by the laws of physics (gravity, the strong and weak nuclear forces etc). Dawkins has said specifically that the process of biological evolution is the very opposite of chance, it is natural selection, governed by survival of the fittest and the laws of physics/nature.

Every design has a designer. Come on now, let's face this for what it is, not this educated nonsense you have learned from a bunch of apostates. Speak reasonably, and in context of a sound mind.
Reply
#5

Chance or Design
(01-03-2024, 09:05 PM)Charlie24 Wrote:
(01-03-2024, 08:59 PM)Dexta Wrote: Design is not the same as designer. The process of evolution could be said to be dictated/designed by the laws of physics (gravity, the strong and weak nuclear forces etc). Dawkins has said specifically that the process of biological evolution is the very opposite of chance, it is natural selection, governed by survival of the fittest and the laws of physics/nature.

Every design has a designer. Come on now, let's face this for what it is, not this educated nonsense you have learned from a bunch of apostates. Speak reasonably, and in context of a sound mind.

Why do I bother  Dunno


[Image: R.c7a2696602672ca966916a787a0dba3b?rik=0...ImgRaw&r=0]
The following 3 users Like Dexta's post:
  • airportkid, pattylt, Chas
Reply
#6

Chance or Design
(01-03-2024, 09:08 PM)Dexta Wrote:
(01-03-2024, 09:05 PM)Charlie24 Wrote: Every design has a designer. Come on now, let's face this for what it is, not this educated nonsense you have learned from a bunch of apostates. Speak reasonably, and in context of a sound mind.

Why do I bother  Dunno


[Image: R.c7a2696602672ca966916a787a0dba3b?rik=0...ImgRaw&r=0]

Just carrying on the tradition between the Atheist and the Theist, I'm curious as to how you can believe these scientists when I have just shown their education has driven them mad.
Reply
#7

Chance or Design
Science doesn't lie, ever.
Reply
#8

Chance or Design
(01-03-2024, 09:05 PM)Charlie24 Wrote: Every design has a designer.

The nature of that "designer" though is not set. Not every "design" is the result of a conscious creative process. Take snowflakes for example. They have patterns and designs, but are not the result of a conscious creative process. They are a crystallin matrix produced by laws of physics and the material in which they are made (water in their case though they are not the only crystallin formation).

This type of axiom is thus completely worthless.
The following 1 user Likes epronovost's post:
  • Aegon
Reply
#9

Chance or Design
(01-03-2024, 09:16 PM)epronovost Wrote:
(01-03-2024, 09:05 PM)Charlie24 Wrote: Every design has a designer.

The nature of that "designer" though is not set. Not every "design" is the result of a conscious creative process. Take snowflakes for example. They have patterns and designs, but are not the result of a conscious creative process. They are a crystallin matrix produced by laws of physics and the material in which they are made (water in their case though they are not the only crystallin formation).

This type of axiom is thus completely worthless.

You are using the results of creation as a means to describe the designer of creation.

You can do better than that, i hiope.
Reply
#10

Chance or Design
(01-03-2024, 08:52 PM)Charlie24 Wrote: The definition of "Chance" from Oxford Languages, in the form of it's use in this thread.

"the occurrence and development of events in the absence of any obvious design."

Evolution has no "obvious designer" therefore it is by "chance." Regardless of what any scientist with his extreme knowledge may say, This is the reason I'll not pursue their theories, it's a total failure on the part of common sense.

It is impossible for this complex universe we live in to be by a chance occurrence as they have laid it out.

How is it possible that an intelligent person can believe this? I have my own theories on that, but would like to hear from you on the matter. If anyone is interested..   

What is design?
Mountain-high though the difficulties appear, terrible and gloomy though all things seem, they are but Mâyâ.
Fear not — it is banished. Crush it, and it vanishes. Stamp upon it, and it dies.


Vivekananda
Reply
#11

Chance or Design
(01-03-2024, 09:21 PM)Dānu Wrote:
(01-03-2024, 08:52 PM)Charlie24 Wrote: The definition of "Chance" from Oxford Languages, in the form of it's use in this thread.

"the occurrence and development of events in the absence of any obvious design."

Evolution has no "obvious designer" therefore it is by "chance." Regardless of what any scientist with his extreme knowledge may say, This is the reason I'll not pursue their theories, it's a total failure on the part of common sense.

It is impossible for this complex universe we live in to be by a chance occurrence as they have laid it out.

How is it possible that an intelligent person can believe this? I have my own theories on that, but would like to hear from you on the matter. If anyone is interested..   

What is design?

Definition of "Design" again from Oxford Languages.

"a plan or drawing produced to show the look and function or workings of a building, garment, or other object before it is built or made."
Reply
#12

Chance or Design
(01-03-2024, 09:05 PM)Charlie24 Wrote:
(01-03-2024, 08:59 PM)Dexta Wrote: Design is not the same as designer. The process of evolution could be said to be dictated/designed by the laws of physics (gravity, the strong and weak nuclear forces etc). Dawkins has said specifically that the process of biological evolution is the very opposite of chance, it is natural selection, governed by survival of the fittest and the laws of physics/nature.

Every design has a designer. Come on now, let's face this for what it is, not this educated nonsense you have learned from a bunch of apostates. Speak reasonably, and in context of a sound mind.

False. Again, what is design?

[Image: giants-causeway%20%282%29%5B6%5D.jpg?imgmax=800]
Mountain-high though the difficulties appear, terrible and gloomy though all things seem, they are but Mâyâ.
Fear not — it is banished. Crush it, and it vanishes. Stamp upon it, and it dies.


Vivekananda
Reply
#13

Chance or Design
(01-03-2024, 09:25 PM)Dānu Wrote:
(01-03-2024, 09:05 PM)Charlie24 Wrote: Every design has a designer. Come on now, let's face this for what it is, not this educated nonsense you have learned from a bunch of apostates. Speak reasonably, and in context of a sound mind.

False.   Again, what is design?

[Image: giants-causeway%20%282%29%5B6%5D.jpg?imgmax=800]

Post #11
Reply
#14

Chance or Design
(01-03-2024, 09:26 PM)Charlie24 Wrote:
(01-03-2024, 09:25 PM)Dānu Wrote: False.   Again, what is design?

[Image: giants-causeway%20%282%29%5B6%5D.jpg?imgmax=800]

Post #11

You're equivocating. That's not the sense in which you are using the word design here. Why are you being dishonest?
Mountain-high though the difficulties appear, terrible and gloomy though all things seem, they are but Mâyâ.
Fear not — it is banished. Crush it, and it vanishes. Stamp upon it, and it dies.


Vivekananda
Reply
#15

Chance or Design
(01-03-2024, 09:27 PM)Dānu Wrote:
(01-03-2024, 09:26 PM)Charlie24 Wrote: Post #11

You're equivocating.  That's not the sense in which you are using the word design here.  Why are you being dishonest?

In the design of creation God had a plan of creation, for example, God said, "let us create man in our own image." 

That is a plan to create something, just as the definition of "design" points out.
Reply
#16

Chance or Design
(01-03-2024, 09:32 PM)Charlie24 Wrote:
(01-03-2024, 09:27 PM)Dānu Wrote: You're equivocating.  That's not the sense in which you are using the word design here.  Why are you being dishonest?

In the design of creation God had a plan of creation, for example, God said, "let us create man in our own image." 

That is a plan to create something, just as the definition of "design" points out.

Okay, but you've simply substituted one unknown term for another. How do we know that something was the result of planning? What are the essential features of a plan?
Mountain-high though the difficulties appear, terrible and gloomy though all things seem, they are but Mâyâ.
Fear not — it is banished. Crush it, and it vanishes. Stamp upon it, and it dies.


Vivekananda
The following 1 user Likes Dānu's post:
  • Chas
Reply
#17

Chance or Design
(01-03-2024, 09:33 PM)Dānu Wrote:
(01-03-2024, 09:32 PM)Charlie24 Wrote: In the design of creation God had a plan of creation, for example, God said, "let us create man in our own image." 

That is a plan to create something, just as the definition of "design" points out.

Okay, but you've simply substituted one unknown term for another.  How do we know that something was the result of planning?  What are the essential features of a plan?

There you go with that madness, leaving all principles of common sense behind.

Just as do your teachers, the scientists.
Reply
#18

Chance or Design
Charlie is an example of the Argument from Personal Incredulity with legs.  

Quote:Argument from incredulity, also known as argument from personal incredulity, appeal to common sense, or the divine fallacy, is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition must be false because it contradicts one's personal expectations or beliefs, or is difficult to imagine.

IOW, Charlie is too stupid to understand the concept. Tell us something we didn't know!
Robert G. Ingersoll : “No man with a sense of humor ever founded a religion.”
The following 1 user Likes Minimalist's post:
  • isbelldl
Reply
#19

Chance or Design
(01-03-2024, 09:36 PM)Charlie24 Wrote:
(01-03-2024, 09:33 PM)Dānu Wrote: Okay, but you've simply substituted one unknown term for another.  How do we know that something was the result of planning?  What are the essential features of a plan?

There you go with that madness, leaving all principles of common sense behind.

Just as do your teachers, the scientists.

In what way are my questions madness? Sounds more like you're trying to duck the question. Are you being dishonest again?
Mountain-high though the difficulties appear, terrible and gloomy though all things seem, they are but Mâyâ.
Fear not — it is banished. Crush it, and it vanishes. Stamp upon it, and it dies.


Vivekananda
Reply
#20

Chance or Design
(01-03-2024, 09:38 PM)Dānu Wrote:
(01-03-2024, 09:36 PM)Charlie24 Wrote: There you go with that madness, leaving all principles of common sense behind.

Just as do your teachers, the scientists.

In what way are my questions madness?  Sounds more like you're trying to duck the question.  Are you being dishonest again?

It seems to me you are dodging the reality of truth by the reasoning of questioning and reinventing the definitions that you don't like.
Reply
#21

Chance or Design
(01-03-2024, 09:41 PM)Charlie24 Wrote:
(01-03-2024, 09:38 PM)Dānu Wrote: In what way are my questions madness?  Sounds more like you're trying to duck the question.  Are you being dishonest again?

It seems to me you are dodging the reality of truth by the reasoning of questioning and reinventing the definitions that you don't like.

No, simply trying to introduce you to one of the central problems of intelligent design. That is how to define the hallmarks of design such that things that legitimately are designed are recognized, and things that aren't designed aren't. William Dembski, noted intelligent design theorist and ostensible smart guy tried and largely failed to capture the essence of design.

But there's an even bigger mystery here lurking just beneath the surface. That mystery is the question of just what we as human beings are doing when we design, and how do we do that, and, more to the point, what is required for the ability to design? It's notable that God designing creation is an analogy to man designing things, but is man's ability to design things a supernatural ability, or is it simply the result of the incredibly complicated machinations of the human mind? If there is nothing unnatural about the mind, and therefore unnatural about our ability to design, then by analogy there need not be anything unnatural that is the cause of the variety of life on this planet, or other things that theists suggest are the product of supernatural design.
Mountain-high though the difficulties appear, terrible and gloomy though all things seem, they are but Mâyâ.
Fear not — it is banished. Crush it, and it vanishes. Stamp upon it, and it dies.


Vivekananda
Reply
#22

Chance or Design
(01-03-2024, 09:24 PM)Charlie24 Wrote: Definition of "Design" again from Oxford Languages.

"a plan or drawing produced to show the look and function or workings of a building, garment, or other object before it is built or made."

Animals, celestial bodies, geological formations, etc are thus not a design according to this definition since it's not a garment, buildings (or part there oft) or object. They are in a different category. How can nature be designed if it's not a building, a garment or an object?
Reply
#23

Chance or Design
(01-03-2024, 09:54 PM)Dānu Wrote:
(01-03-2024, 09:41 PM)Charlie24 Wrote: It seems to me you are dodging the reality of truth by the reasoning of questioning and reinventing the definitions that you don't like.

No, simply trying to introduce you to one of the central problems of intelligent design.  That is how to define the hallmarks of design such that things that legitimately are designed are recognized, and things that aren't designed aren't.  William Dembski, noted intelligent design theorist and ostensible smart guy tried and largely failed to capture the essence of design.  

But there's an even bigger mystery here lurking just beneath the surface.  That mystery is the question of just what we as human beings are doing when we design, and how do we do that, and, more to the point, what is required for the ability to design?  It's notable that God designing creation is an analogy to man designing things, but is man's ability to design things a supernatural ability, or is it simply the result of the incredibly complicated machinations of the human mind?  If there is nothing unnatural about the mind, and therefore unnatural about our ability to design, then by analogy there need not be anything unnatural that is the cause of the variety of life on this planet, or other things that theists suggest are the product of supernatural design.

Nope, I see your entire post as the attempt to dismantle and rebuild a perfectly clear definition to suit your own agenda.

But I expect it, that's what you have learned from your teachers to avoid what we call common sense, in order to reinvent something into what you want it to be.
Reply
#24

Chance or Design
(01-03-2024, 09:37 PM)Minimalist Wrote: IOW, Charlie is too stupid to understand the concept. Tell us something we didn't know!

Apparently.  My post #3 went clear over his head.  The Argument from Incredulity is worse than it sounds - more than simply denying what is misunderstood, it asserts that everyone else who DOES understand can only be idiots.  Kind of the same thing as an ostrich sticking its head in the sand thinking since it can't see, nothing can see it.

Rofl2
The following 1 user Likes airportkid's post:
  • pattylt
Reply
#25

Chance or Design
(01-03-2024, 10:02 PM)Charlie24 Wrote:
(01-03-2024, 09:54 PM)Dānu Wrote: No, simply trying to introduce you to one of the central problems of intelligent design.  That is how to define the hallmarks of design such that things that legitimately are designed are recognized, and things that aren't designed aren't.  William Dembski, noted intelligent design theorist and ostensible smart guy tried and largely failed to capture the essence of design.  

But there's an even bigger mystery here lurking just beneath the surface.  That mystery is the question of just what we as human beings are doing when we design, and how do we do that, and, more to the point, what is required for the ability to design?  It's notable that God designing creation is an analogy to man designing things, but is man's ability to design things a supernatural ability, or is it simply the result of the incredibly complicated machinations of the human mind?  If there is nothing unnatural about the mind, and therefore unnatural about our ability to design, then by analogy there need not be anything unnatural that is the cause of the variety of life on this planet, or other things that theists suggest are the product of supernatural design.

Nope, I see your entire post as the attempt to dismantle and rebuild a perfectly clear definition to suit your own agenda.

But I expect it, that's what you have learned from your teachers to avoid what we call common sense, in order to reinvent something into what you want it to be.

You're being dishonest again. Do you know nothing of your god's commandments?
Mountain-high though the difficulties appear, terrible and gloomy though all things seem, they are but Mâyâ.
Fear not — it is banished. Crush it, and it vanishes. Stamp upon it, and it dies.


Vivekananda
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)