@suzianne saidIf you read the thread, you'd realize KellyJay's opinion is that the universe is either created by "a designer" or it is the result of "mindlessness". Obviously, KellyJay doesn't believe it is the result of "mindlessness" because he believes in a God who he sees as being the universe's "designer".
And that's why it's not "mindless".
Has God ever left any of his plans "half-baked"?
@fmf saidWas I talking to you?
If you read the thread, you'd realize KellyJay's opinion is that the universe is either created by "a designer" or it is the result of "mindlessness". Obviously, KellyJay doesn't believe it is the result of "mindlessness" because he believes in a God who he sees as being the universe's "designer".
Perhaps you'd care to follow the convo instead of interrupting with what ever you're talking about.
@fmf saidYou DO realize that your masturbatory self-musings have no relevance to the ongoing conversation, right? Because you seem to be the only one talking about whatever you're talking about.
And then, does it have to have communicated or revealed its human-like wishes, threats, promises, and rewards, to human beings here on Earth?
@kellyjay saidI guess 'bump' means you do require clarification of what I said, well ok:
bump
You asked me "How do you tell the difference between something that requires intelligence and what doesn’t?" and I responded that unless you know everything, you can't. Context was relevant here, in that what you were suggesting was that the Universe and life within it was a result of design, and the complexity of it was such that you felt it must imply a 'designer'. I disagreed then and still do, because I feel that we simply don't have the necessary knowledge of the processes by which the universe and life within it came to be. Without knowing these details, it really isn't possible to judge whether or not it was designed. I realise that my previous short response may have been unclear and open to misinterpretation, and I hope this clears that up for you.
@fmf saidApparently you haven't read the thread, or else you'd recognize that KJ thinks there must be a dichotomy, an "either/or". I addressed this exactly. You, on the other hand, haven't.
If you read the thread, you'd realize KellyJay's opinion is that the universe is either created by "a designer" or it is the result of "mindlessness". Obviously, KellyJay doesn't believe it is the result of "mindlessness" because he believes in a God who he sees as being the universe's "designer".
@avalanchethecat saidExcept that it ignores KJ's central point, and has chosen to beat him about the head and shoulders about his choice of words. He can either participate, or wallow in his irrelevance.
FMF's contribution seems entirely relevant to the thread from my perspective.
2 edits
@suzianne saidI think the conversation has moved past the recognition of the perjorative term KJ is using to describe a non-designed universe. As I see it FMF is demonstrating that KJ's assertion that certain processes point to a universal designer is predicated on his christian faith, which is certainly relevant to the thread.
Except that it ignores KJ's central point, and has chosen to beat him about the head and shoulders about his choice of words. He can either participate, or wallow in his irrelevance.
1 edit
@avalanchethecat saidI don't believe we can, just by looking at it, know how the universe came into being; that, however, wasn't the question. The question is, from what we see, from what we know the attributes in the universe, in life, do they speak to something that had a guiding hand a design, or could all of the things that we see come about without a plan or purpose. Some things require a designer; some require a tuner; some, no matter the probabilities, could occur, which seems the most reasonable when you look at the whole?
I guess 'bump' means you do require clarification of what I said, well ok:
You asked me "How do you tell the difference between something that requires intelligence and what doesn’t?" and I responded that unless you know everything, you can't. Context was relevant here, in that what you were suggesting was that the Universe and life within it was a result of design ...[text shortened]... esponse may have been unclear and open to misinterpretation, and I hope this clears that up for you.
@kellyjay saidThere are certainly things which suggest to me that our purely materialist view of the universe may not be the whole story, but for the most part it seems entirely reasonable to me that everything we see could have arisen without any form of guiding hand. Having said that, I freely accept the possibility that I am wrong.
I don't believe we can, just by looking at it, know how the universe came into being; that, however, wasn't the question. The question is, from what we see, from what we know the attributes in the universe, in life, do they speak to something that had a guiding hand a design, or could all of the things that we see come about without a plan or purpose. Some things require a d ...[text shortened]... o matter the probabilities, could occur, which seems the most reasonable when you look at the whole?
@avalanchethecat saidWell, the whole story is the only one that answers all of the questions; if we only look at those things that fit our narratives, if we only listen to like-minded people, the whole story will never enter into the picture.
There are certainly things which suggest to me that our purely materialist view of the universe may not be the whole story, but for the most part it seems entirely reasonable to me that everything we see could have arisen without any form of guiding hand. Having said that, I freely accept the possibility that I am wrong.
@kellyjay saidIndeed, however it also important to retain control of one's critical faculties and apply them vigorously and appropriately to all data and sources.
Well, the whole story is the only one that answers all of the questions; if we only look at those things that fit our narratives, if we only listen to like-minded people, the whole story will never enter into the picture.
@kellyjay saidIt's interesting to see you reflect on your own perspectives in this way.
Well, the whole story is the only one that answers all of the questions; if we only look at those things that fit our narratives, if we only listen to like-minded people, the whole story will never enter into the picture.
@avalanchethecat saidI agree
Indeed, however it also important to retain control of one's critical faculties and apply them vigorously and appropriately to all data and sources.