Origin of Life: new commentaries (Introduction)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Sunday, February 06, 2011, 01:49 (5039 days ago) @ romansh

Romansh,-> You may well think there is a universal intelligence. But for me your logic seems to be I disagree with the mainstream view, I think things are too complex to arise spontaneously, therefore there must be a UI. Is this an accurate summation of your position David?-He actually wrote a book about it. (Which I still need to read.) But over the last 3 years of discussion, here's a brief summary: -Basically he's making a decision right now based on the evidence we have, partially because our society pressures us to make a choice. He infers an intelligence; it's a much more sophisticated watchmaker argument, but it is a good analogy. He however does not posit beyond that inference. He observes that Natural Selection itself doesn't seem to be rapid enough (as did Gould) and believes a UI is the agent of rapid change. He fully acknowledges that none of this is testable and that it is ultimately a position of faith, but, relying on Thomist/Aristotelian logic, believes that reason alone is sufficient to make his claim. He's not a traditional theist, he just takes a philosophical position based on the evidence at hand. -He resists making claims against the UI, but I don't see why not... if reason alone is enough... (dhw and I have used David's UI model to talk a bit about this UI's nature.)

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"