Arguments against Design (General)

by dhw, Thursday, August 06, 2009, 14:40 (5400 days ago) @ BBella

BBella: If there is a UI then I figure it is aware of itself [.......] If there is a UI, it is the fabric of which everything is made of. So even tho something seems to self-replicate before our eyes, in reality it would just be morphing/shapeshifting the fabric into what it is becoming.... - Thank you for your explanations. Clearly self-awareness is the crucial factor distinguishing your concept from the atheist one. If I've understood you correctly, the UI deliberately transforms a bit of its material self into a self-replicating molecule. Since there is no new substance, all the replications and indeed all of us are "shapeshifts" by the UI, and evolution is a consciously engineered process through which the UI continually transforms itself, although it is learning as it goes along. - If this interpretation is correct, what we have in essence is a combination of mind and body. In this case, the conscious mind can do whatever it wants with the body ... in other words, it is the mind, the UI, that is in control. Is there, then, any difference between this concept and that of the conventional Creator figure, who also does what he pleases with the material world? Instead of fiddling around with extraneous matter, your UI fiddles around with its own "fabric". - You pointed out in an earlier post (1 August at 21.24) that some people picture God as an outside being "tinkering", but even as an insider he's monitoring himself and his work, and according to the above he's still tinkering. So he's not an outside designer but an inside designer. And if he's learning, he must have some degree of detachment. Furthermore, if you ask your Christian, Jewish and Muslim friends when God was born, they'll tell you he's eternal; if you ask, as Matt does, what are his limits, they'll tell you he's infinite; if you ask where you can find him, they'll tell you he's everywhere and in everything, including you. And so the only real difference ... please forgive me if I'm being obtuse ... between your God and the conventional monotheistic God / Yahweh / Allah, is that yours is still learning, whereas theirs already knows it all. Is that an accurate assessment, or have I missed something? - None of the above should be taken negatively, by the way. I'm just trying to understand the concept, and am breaking it down into my own terms. - In your reply to George, you emphasize the limitations of science, and adduce your personal experiences as evidence. This is a point that has been raised many times on the forum, but it keeps disappearing again. Your own case can be multiplied many times over, and since all our conclusions in this context are based ultimately on conviction and not on provable fact, I think it's a point well worth repeating!