How is EM a valid (let alone “the best”) argument against ID? ID is the (unconvincing) hypothesis that certain developments in the evolution of life are best explained by the intervention of an “intelligent designer”. That view is entirely compatible with EM. Granted, most IDers see their “designer” as an immaterial god or supernatural force, but this role can also be performed by an advanced alien species, as some leading IDers concede.
I don’ t know hey. Help me out here.
“Mental phenomena do not exist” vs “intelligent designers”?
“That only thing that exists is matter” vs “immaterial intelligent designers with non-existent mental phenomena”?
Mmmm… Do you have mental phenomena?
““immaterial intelligent designers with non-existent mental phenomena”?
ID doesn’t require the Intelligent Designer to be non-material. It/they could be an advanced alien species, for example.
Personally, I find the existence of mental phenomena self-evident and therefore give no credence to EM. However, those who believe in EM presumably believe that an Apple engineer can design an iPad without mental phenomena, so why couldn’t an Intelligent Designer design… I don’t know, a species, or whatever it is they supposedly design without mental phenomena?
Those who believe in EM “presumably” believe that an Apple engineer can design without mental phenomena? Presumably?
Do explain yourself there please.
Haha, good point. Still, as a non-EMer, I have no problem presuming things, and I doubt you do either.
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Google+ account. ( Log Out / Change )
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.