View Single Post
  #30  
Old Feb 21st 2012, 06:49 PM
Michael's Avatar
Michael Michael is offline
Administrator
Herder of Cats
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 14,835
Default Re: Scientific determinism

Quote:
Originally Posted by rstones199 View Post
Maybe I misinterpreted what you said here:







I took it that you think that because the laws of physics are 'man made laws' that these could not be applied to a design w/o a designer.






Is this correct?
Not necessarily.

I'm specifically objecting the idea of speaking of the universe as 'a design' without a 'designer' involved. I mean, I think it is reasonable to speak metaphorically about 'nature's design' without implying a specific designer, but generally speaking, I'm always suspicious of attempts to assert that some rules (or facts) are absolutes (which is what a design is - an absolute). And that is always 'the camel's nose under the tent' for God/creator to re-enter the picture as 'necessary'.

Indeed, I might add that the existence of a design is a plan and a plan by definition has a goal. I find that hard to rationally grasp if a designer isn't present. I can't imagine the random chancing and evolutionary results (from the chemical level to human level over billions of years) could/would produce a coherent design-like plan, though I can rationally understand why any given result would in fact look that way to us humans doing the observing.
__________________
Remember what the dormouse said: Feed your head!
Reply With Quote