WHEREAMI, what exactly are you comparing to a dead horse?
The fact that this has been dealt with many times over with the man himself explaining what was going on during that sad excuse for a documentary.
Richard Dawkins believes in intelligent design?
by slimboyfat 78 Replies latest jw friends
-
whereami
-
slimboyfat
So no Dawkins does not undermine his case at all, he simply makes a concession that abiogenesis may or may not have happened only on earth.
Not exactly, because the possibility that Dawkins was entertaining was not merely panspermia (that life originated elsewhere in the universe and arrived on earth) but directed panspermia (that life as we know it was designed by vastly superios aliens and placed on earth). Dawkins also adds that if such vastly superior aliens were responsible for designing life on earth, then they likely owed their own existence to a process of Darwinian evolution. But the reason we can say that life on earth has evolved by Darwinian evolution is because we observe the relatedness of life on earth, the role of genes, the fossil record, and survival characteristics and behaviours in living organisms. If life on earth was designed by vastly superior aliens then we do not have access to the nature of the life these aliens possess or their history, therefore there is little basis on which to draw the conclusion that their form of existence is the result of a Darwinian type of evolution. Indeed the only reason for Dawkins so concluding is that he wishes there to be a naturalistic or even Darwinian explanation for life right to the very beginning, whether the evidence is present in the scenario or not. If life could have been designed by vastly superior aliens whose form of existence we are not familiar with, then why assume that, like our, their form of existence is the result of Darwinian evolution? Without knowing their mode of existence or its history would it not be better to leave open the question of how they came to be?
-
TheClarinetist
Dawkins argument for the origin of said alien species is actually in "The God Delusion". The idea I believe he was trying to get across, though I by no means am his spokesperson, is that the chance of the alien species coming spontaneously into existance is so astronomically low as to be impossible. Hence, they themselves would have had to come about via a natural process. It has nothing to do with wishing and is only related to the laws of the universe as we currently understand them.
-
slimboyfat
is that the chance of the alien species coming spontaneously into existance is so astronomically low as to be impossible.
Yes but spontaneously coming into existence is only one possibility that does not invoke Darwinian evolution. What if instead they have always been?
-
cofty
Ok so lets leave open the question of where a theoretical world of aliens originated. Now where does god fit in?
You still don't get to posit an entity of ultimate complexity out of nowhere and pretend you have solved anything.
-
TheClarinetist
Darwinian aliens are distinctly possible, if unlikely, within what we currently know, but the infinite aliens would require a LOT of proof... Along the lines of us tracing back the big bang and finding out the explosion spelled "LoL. We've been here forever. Bet you can't read this for another fourteen billion years". The more extraordinary the claim, the more extraordinary the required proof... And infinite aliens are infinitely more extraordinary than Darwinian ones...
EDIT: I'm sure there's a more reasonable proof they would be able to provide... That's just all I could think of off the top of my head.
EDIT2: This seems like the same argument, and basically is. The idea is that a creature that has always been is so far out of the realm of known science that it cannot be reasonably conjectured at this time with any scientific merit. (Though they always make for interesting thought experiments)
-
slimboyfat
Ok so lets leave open the question of where a theoretical world of aliens originated. Now where does god fit in?
God could be a different name for the aliens of course. The Gospel of John even says that what distinguishes God is that he has life in himself. Unlike any other being his existence is self-sufficient.
You still don't get to posit an entity of ultimate complexity out of nowhere and pretend you have solved anything.
I am not sure that it solves anything as such either, just that it is a possibility as to how things stand. The very fact that there is something rather than nothing is the most wondrous and unfathomable realisation in itself. Whether there is a ground to all existence it is worth calling God and whether s/he or it takes a special interest in life on earth does not detract from the mystery either way. Neither Darwin, the big bang, multi-verses nor any general theory "solves" the problem of existence either. No matter how far back you push the natural explanation for cause and effect, the question always appears at the end of the trail as a persistent ghost: why is there something rather than nothing at all?
-
TheClarinetist
There is no cause and effect as we no it before the big bang. Time is just a dimension of the universe. For all we know, there was no time before it... And there are times that cause and effect don't apply in the same order... With effect coming before cause (at least in a laboratory)... And I forgot where I was going with this idea, but its a cool idea nonetheless.
-
cofty
The very fact that there is something rather than nothing is the most wondrous and unfathomable realisation in itself.
I totally agree. Also the fact that I personally exist never fails to astonish me, what's the chances? The universe is far more amazing than we can comprehend.
Perhaps its a willingness to live with unknowns rather than adopt answers with insufficient evidence is the biggest change in my "worldview" in recent years. (sorry for using the word worldview)
-
slimboyfat
EDIT2: This seems like the same argument, and basically is. The idea is that a creature that has always been is so far out of the realm of known science that it cannot be reasonably conjectured at this time with any scientific merit. (Though they always make for interesting thought experiments)
My point is that if you are going to allow for the possibility that aliens designed life on earth then the scientifically neutral position would be to leave open the question of how and whether those aliens in turn have a finite or eternal existence. Life on earth has a beginning and an end. Even the longest living organisms are finite. And in turn species do not last forever, but change over time, and branch, or become extict. We know that about life on earth because the evidence is abundant. The evidence that life on earth has arrived in all its many forms by a process of Darwinian evolution is clear. We look at the structure of organisms, their DNA, how they are related to each other, and their history in the fossil record, and we conclude that species came about by Darwinian evolution. We don't have access to any of that information in relation to the vastly superior aliens who may have ultimately designed life on earth. Neither do we have any evidence that their existence like ours is finite. There is no good reason to conclude that because that is the nature of life on earth that all living beings must be similar, much less concerning the lifeforms which may have designed life on earth, except if you are writing a polemic the purpose of which is to exclude the possibility of a God.