Friday, 04 November 2005
-
Joveia & Theism
THEISTIC BLOG REVIEW:
For: Mr. Jargon
About: A friend of his’ 12 page blog concerning his personal justification for theism
Source: http://www.joveiaphilosopher.blogspot.com/
My mission: poke holes
Part: 1 of 15
“The Argument To Design”
You act like you would ever leave design to ever need to argue to it.
“1. Introduction
The argument to design along with the cosmological argument is one of the earliest and most iconic arguments for the existence of a designer. The early design arguments were of course mainly biological, rooted in an appreciation for nature.”I appreciate nature: therefore God exists.
“However since Darwin, the design argument has moved further back and now the modern teleological argument (except the intelligent design movement) says that the constants of the universe (the physical laws) are of such a kind that they could not have happened by chance, thus indicating design."
The argument has already moved back from that as well. ..back so far…I don’t think we’re in theism any more, Toto.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle
"An enormous number of eloquent objections have been leveled against this argument, called the Strong Anthropic Principle, which I will go over now and see how well they hold up against two different variations on the argument I support."
- Strong anthropic principle (SAP): "The Universe must have those properties which allow life to develop within it at some stage in its history."
Well, you could reason creationism could be congruent with SAP. “God must have created those properties which allow for life to exist as some stage in history.” Why it must be against a theistic argument is beyond me. I see other things against your arguments…but SAP isn’t one of them.
ARU
-
recommend
- recs 0
-
email
- sent 0
- like
Related Posts
Post a Comment
- Back to WAR_ON_ERROR's Xanga Site!
- Note: your comment will appear in WAR_ON_ERROR's local time zone: GMT -06:00 (Central Standard - US, Canada)
Comments (4)
Hey, thanks for stopping by and commenting on my blog. Excellent suggestions. I'll have to try them all out and see how it goes!
As for "Wicked" being anything like the Oz books, I haven't read them, Ive only seen the movie. However, now that I've finished reading Wicked, I would like to know how different it is from Frank Baum's books. It is definately different from the movie, if that means anything. I enjoyed Wicked, I especially liked the religious questions and clashes throughout the book. And always, the question of good and evil. The Oz of Wicked is very much like our world, just with different names and a colorful coat of paint. Perhaps it makes it easier to scrutinize ourselves when we dont realize it is actually us that we are analyzing. I think maybe that was Gregory Maguire's aim.
I haven't read the entire conversation going on here about the Design argument, but I personally dont know why so many people are ready to accept the equation "We dont know how it works, therefore it must be God". That is a huge leap. My 2 pennies, which might not even apply here.
Anyways, thanks for the response!
No problem. I'm full of good advice, that I even take myself on occasion.
This is just the intro to a five parter. You've pretty much picked up right where the crux of the matter is...two cents well spent.
Oh yeah, anyone interested...the Oz books are highly entertaining and if you like books in a series like I do...its a gift that keeps on giving. There's twelve. Kids like them and adults enjoy some higher concepts and humor along the way.
ARU