Yes, I know this is an argument that has been batted back and forth for centuries.
Yes, and I don't expect we'll be solving it on K5 anytime soon. :) In any case, divine creation can neither be proved nor disproved short of the deity involved showing up and saying "Hi, I'm your Creator, here's all the evidence and proof you could want, feel free to run experiments on me, oh, and here's my detailed documentation on how I influenced the universe over the last few billion years." So, we remain in a state of ambiguity on the question...
I may not know all the answers, but I'm willing to take a leap of faith. I'd rather take a leap of faith on an intelligent creator than blind chance.
Personally, I've always felt that a self-created universe is more miraculous, more amazing, more beautiful than one shaped by a creator's will. If it came about by 'blind chance', then it's a wondrous thing, not something to be scorned at!
You mentioned watchmakers. If you find a watch on the sidewalk and look at all of it's intricate gears moving in step with each other, would you believe it fell together by chance over millions of years or would you believe that someone you hadn't seen put it together.
Dawkins makes an excellent rebuttal to this argument in his book - I seriously recommend you visit your local library and check it out. Even if you find it overly preachy, it's an interesting read, especially if random biological oddities amuse you. To summarize his argument briefly: look closer at the watch, you'll notice a lot of things about it that are inefficient, random, or even somewhat detrimental to its function, but that it works well enough as a timepiece - completely in sync with, say, a theory that random watch parts might fall together in a bin, and that you only see the ones that work well enough to pass quality assurance.
Or, to turn the watch thing on its head... if you see a watch lying on the sidewalk, do you assume that it was left there deliberately, carefully placed so that you would find it - or that somebody dropped it by accident?
When they found the heads Easter Island, they knew right away that they were designed by intelligence.
The other big problem with the watch/watchmaker analogy... The explorers here would have had previous experience with statuary, knowing that statues are made by human beings. Thus, upon finding statuary, human beings were assumed to have made them. Ditto with the watch - we know that watches are made by people, so we automatically will assume a creator when we find another watch and start from there. If you've never seen such a thing, you might not know what to think.
If the bonding angle of H2O was one hundred billionth of an inch shorter or longer, life would not exist.
Yes - amazing to think that this tiny molecule works exactly that way! But... when you think about it, it must work that way. Any universe in which water did not work in this way could not support life, and thus wouldn't contain people to ponder that fact. By definition, the universe we live in must support life, it is a 100% probability that we live in such a universe...
Life to me is a miracle.
Absolutely! We're in agreement there.
I'm not saying all of evolution is wrong, but I feel that it is a bit overhyped. The fact that is true doesn't destroy my faith in higher intelligence.
Intelligent behavior doesn't have to come from deliberate intelligence (if such a thing really exists). Natural selection is the classic example, overhyped or not - pretty good (but not perfect) beings come about by being the ones to reproduce and survive in their environment. My personal conception of "God" is the living universe: conscious/deliberate/personified or not, it exists and is pretty darned interesting.
Chu vi parolas Vikipedion?
[ Parent ]