An article in the mrzine [Monthly Review ezine] has an article, "Neo-Paleyism’s Assault on Reason," by Richard York, that has a very interesting thought on intelligent design that puts a hole into the argument itself.
Supporters of this movement are not deterred by the demonstrated power of natural selection to craft organisms finely attuned to their environments or by the rather obvious point that by renouncing material causes, they have created an infinite regress of explanation – i.e., surely the existence of an intelligent designer requires an even more extraordinary explanation than the existence of an object that appears to have been intelligently designed, so, if we are to follow the "logic" of intelligent design, we must invoke a designer of the designer, and so forth ad infinitum.
Wouldn't it be interesting if we were nothing more than an experiment being performed in a lab by an "intelligent designer" scientist who also is an experiment in a lab by another "intelligent designer" who is in a lab in an experiment by another "intelligent designer...?"
just asking...
No comments:
Post a Comment