Even without us. But still, we're here.
Originally posted by Classic NES
Well, whether there is an intelligent force behind origin of life or not is of no consequence to Evolution. Rather, I simply don't get how new species arise in the ID model for life. In evolution it's Macro-Evolution, while in ID it's what exactly?
In ID I think it could be called something like Guided Evolution.
Originally posted by inimalist
its a matter of perspectiveand really only like 80% true
how about: Do organisms really exist aside from single cell organisms, or possibly even single replicating units of DNA?
bio-philosophy 😛
That is a good point. We are really just a community of single cell organisms. So, in a way, we are not alive, but the being that is "us" is the product of trillions of living beings. 😱
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Ok; say it wasn't guided, and it's existence isn't one big fat accident; then what exactly is the third guess you're suggesting? Be specific.
It's not guided, and it's not an accident. Or maybe, it is guided and it is an accident. No one ever thinks about those two possibility.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
It's not guided, and it's not an accident.
Right, cause there never were deists ever.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Or maybe, it is guided and it is an accident. No one ever thinks about those two possibility.
Wouldn't that be evolution, guided through laws of natural selection?
Originally posted by DigiMark007
Yeah, seems like it. Because ID'ers like describing evolution as "accident" or "random chance" when it is far from it.
Actually no. Evolution is based on mutation. And mutation is accidental. It's survival is only due to the particular circumstances in which the mutation takes place, In one place it can't survive, in another it could thrive. That is all chance and accident. Because without sudden mutation there would be no development in the species.
Originally posted by inimalistYeah. It could fit that definition though. Guided does not have to mean set out. Besides, a beleiver in Newtonian sciences would certainly subscribe to it being guided by the laws of physics.
yes and no. It would come down to the philosophical implications of "guide".lol, stuff is hard to describe sometimes, but guided works, if it does open up arguments about determinism.
Originally posted by ShakyamunisonBut you cited it as examples people do not talk about, while, in fact, it is a view that is predominant among scientists and very dominant on the whole.
Yes, that was the point. I'm glad you got it.
So, to you there are following four possibilites, at least:
Accident - Not Guided
Accident - Guided
Purposely Designed - Not Guided
Purposely Designed - Guided
A lot comes down to your definition of guided. But I would say "Purposely Designed - Guided" would be Christianity, Islam, other sorts of Religions. "Purposely Designed - Not Guided" would be deists ideas ... a sort of non intervention God, which some branches of Christianity suppose. "Accident - Guided" would be a universe that was created by a sort of big bang and is now set out to work out one way a deterministic view, which is not necessarily uncommon. And "Accident - Not Guided" could be seen as a sort of free will believe and start with the Big Bang.
Please elaborate if I am all the way off, Shakya. Also answer the question I an Ush asked in the other thread.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Yeah. It could fit that definition though. Guided does not have to mean set out. Besides, a beleiver in Newtonian sciences would certainly subscribe to it being guided by the laws of physics.But you cited it as examples people do not talk about, while, in fact, it is a view that is predominant among scientists and very dominant on the whole.
No, I was referring to Christians ID supporters.
This was the post I was talking about:
Originally posted by queeq
It's rather simple. ID-ers think there must be an intelligence behind the way life, matter etc. is arranged on a molecluar level. Other than everything came into being by pure chance and coincidence. Some people just have trouble to believe that all life as we know it came from an accidental living cell that accidentally truned into the millions of species and plants that swarm the planet Earth. And using arguments from molecular research they find some clues to how it seems there is a certain design behind it.
ID-ers believe there is only two choices: 1, god made it or 2, things happened by chance.
All I was saying is that the universe does not need chance or a god to be fine.
I don't believe that chance is real. It is only a statement that says we don't know. However, the universe works from laws that do not require that we understand them. Most ID-ers never make this distinction.
Originally posted by ShakyamunisonI agree that IDers are short sighted in that respect. Oh well, I thought you were referring to all people. Cause those theories do exist.
No, I was referring to Christians ID supporters.This was the post I was talking about:
ID-ers believe there is only two choices: 1, god made it or 2, things happened by chance.
All I was saying is that the universe does not need chance or a god to be fine.
I don't believe that chance is real. It is only a statement that says we don't know. However, the universe works from laws that do not require that we understand them. Most ID-ers never make this distinction.