Category: ID Foundations
|January 28, 2014||Posted by kairosfocus under Functionally Specified Complex Information & Organization, ID Foundations, They said it . . ., Video|
VJT has recently posted on what kind of cosmos God made, remarking on the Don Johnson bioinformatics lecture. He linked but didn’t embed, so here is the lecture: embedded by Embedded Videovimeo Direkt And, here is the handout. No comments — go to VJT’s thread. OOPS, something funny there so I open back up comments […]
|January 28, 2014||Posted by kairosfocus under academic freedom, Darwinist rhetorical tactics, ID Foundations, science education, Science, worldview issues/foundations and society, Selective Hyperskepticism, They said it . . .|
Good day, my name is JoeG and I would like to get something out in the open and hopefully have it become fully understood by everyone. For decades I have been debating against evolutionism and for decades I have been told that my position is “anti-evolution.” I found that strange because my position allows for […]
ID Foundations 23: Dr Stephen Meyer on The Design Inference on Complex [often, Functionally] Specified Information and the Origin of Cell-based Life (OoL)
|January 9, 2014||Posted by kairosfocus under Functionally Specified Complex Information & Organization, ID Foundations, Irreducible Complexity, The Design of Life|
This lecture by Dr Stephen Meyer of Discovery Institute, with Q & A may be a good refresher and focus for thought on OoL, HT WK: embedded by Embedded VideoYouTube Direkt WK — a useful blog to bookmark and monitor to see trends and issues — gives a helpful bullet point outline, in part: intelligent […]
ID Foundations, 22: What about evolutionary trees of descent and homologies? (An answer to Jaceli123’s presentation of a typical icon of evolution . . . )
As has been noted, sometimes people come to UD looking for answers to questions about what they have been taught regarding “Evolution”; typically in the context of indoctrination under the Lewontinian ideological a priori materialism that he outlined thusly in his infamous 1997 NYRB article: [T]he problem is to get [the general public] to reject […]
“I’ve grown accustomed to your face . . . ” — headlining a comment by ayearningforpublius to pose the question of origin of a significant case of FSCO/I . . . functionally specific, complex organization and/or associated information
|December 28, 2013||Posted by kairosfocus under Design inference, Functionally Specified Complex Information & Organization, ID Foundations, Intelligent Design|
New UD commenter ayearningforpublius has put up a comment on the implications of facial recognition, several times. I think it significant enough as a case of FSCO/I and the challenge of addressing its origin, to headline it. But first, let’s put up the vid clip he links: embedded by Embedded VideoYouTube Direkt Now, his remarks: […]
|December 27, 2013||Posted by kairosfocus under Atheism, Darwinism, Darwinist rhetorical tactics, ID Foundations, Intelligent Design, Logic and First Principles of right reason, Science, worldview issues/foundations and society, They said it . . .|
On Christmas Day, WJM put the following hypothetical conversation in a comment. Since he has not headlined it himself, as promised yesterday, I now do so: Typical debate with an anti-ID advocate: ID advocate: There are certain things that exist that are best explained by intelligent design. Anti-ID advocate: Whoa! Hold up there, fella. “Explained”, […]
ID Foundations, 21: MF — “as a materialist I believe intelligence to be a blend of the determined and random so for me that is not a third type of explanation” . . . a root worldview assumption based cause for rejecting the design inference emerges into plain view
|December 24, 2013||Posted by kairosfocus under Atheism, Design inference, Functionally Specified Complex Information & Organization, ID Foundations, Philosophy, Science, worldview issues/foundations and society, They said it . . .|
In the OK thread, in comment 50, ID objector Mark Frank has finally laid out the root of ever so many of the objections to the design inference filter. Unsurprisingly, it is a worldview based controlling a priori of materialism: [re EA] #38 [MF, in 50:] I see “chance” as usually meaning to “unpredictable” or […]
The famous Feynman Lectures on Physics hosted free for all by Caltech (and taking a peek at entropy . . . )
|December 7, 2013||Posted by kairosfocus under Education, ID Foundations, Physics, science education, thermodynamics and information|
Christmas is early this year. Here are the famous Feynman Lectures on Physics (Vol II is forthcoming) hosted for free by Caltech. A useful point of reference for one and all. Just for fun, note here on on entropy, irreversibility and the rise of disorder: Where does irreversibility come from? It does not come from […]
|December 6, 2013||Posted by kairosfocus under Astronomy, Cosmology, Design inference, Fine tuning, ID Foundations, Privileged planet, Science, worldview issues/foundations and society|
Yesterday, News put up a post on the mysterious origins of the moon, invoking a classic song on being caught between the Moon and New York City. (Niwrad added a post here on the multiverse that is also worth seeing. Kindly bear in mind this earlier ID Foundations post on fine tuning.) Mahuna aptly comments: […]
|October 29, 2013||Posted by kairosfocus under Comp. Sci. / Eng., Functionally Specified Complex Information & Organization, ID Foundations, Science, worldview issues/foundations and society|
For some little while now, RDF/AIGuy has been advocating a strong AI claim here at UD. In an exchange in the ongoing is ID fatally flawed thread, he has said: 222: Computers are of course not conscious. Computers of course can be creative, and computers are of course intelligent agents. Now before you blow a […]
|October 1, 2013||Posted by kairosfocus under Design inference, ID Foundations, Intelligent Design|
HT, ENV. Let’s Embed, from here: Explore more infographics like this one on the web’s largest information design community – Visually. And, let us discuss. END
|September 27, 2013||Posted by kairosfocus under academic freedom, Darwinist rhetorical tactics, FYI-FTR, ID Foundations, Science, worldview issues/foundations and society||
Sometimes, it is necessary to shine a spotlight on behaviour that is beyond the pale of reasonable civil discourse. Especially if, after repeated attempts to call for correction, we see instead the blog owner — here, EL of TSZ — and others insistently pretending that such falls within the circle of reasonable freedom of expression. […]
|September 25, 2013||Posted by kairosfocus under Darwinism, Evolution, ID Foundations, Origin Of Life, UD's Pro-Darwinism essay Challenge|
It seems we can now put together at least a draft outline composite response to the UD pro-darwinism essay challenge of a year ago, based on Jerad’s remarks at 70 in the one-year anniversary thread, and a key concession by EL at 149 in the same. In the interests of moving the discussion on the […]
UD Pro-Darwinism essay challenge unanswered a year later, I: Let’s get the essence of design theory as a scientific, inductive inference straight
Today marks a full year since I issued an open challenge to Darwinists to ground their theory and its OOL extension and root, in light of actually observed capabilities of blind watchmaker mechanisms of chance and necessity through an essay I would host here at UD. The pivot of the challenge is the modern version […]
Ran across this Biola video lecture (in course BB ST 450) on scientism in a thread from a few months back, HT BA77 as usual. I think it is well worth pondering: embedded by Embedded VideoYouTube Direkt So, thoughts? END
They said it: “in the spirit of Carthago delenda est . . . ” — AF issues a strawman fallacy-tainted challenge to design thought
|August 7, 2013||Posted by kairosfocus under Atheism, Darwinist rhetorical tactics, Design inference, Functionally Specified Complex Information & Organization, FYI-FTR, ID Foundations, They said it . . .|
Longtime design objector AF has just issued an inadvertently revealing challenge in the Info by accident thread: AF, 224: >> And in the spirit of Carthago delenda est if anyone has a testable hypothesis of “Intelligent Design”, that would be good, too!>> This is brazen, and utterly revealing. Cato’s “Carthage must fall” was a declaration […]
RDF/AIG as a case of the incoherence and rhetorical agenda of evolutionary materialist thought and/or its fellow- traveller ideologies
For the past several weeks, there has been an exchange that developed in the eduction vs persuasion thread (put up May 9th by AndyJones), on first principles of right reason and related matters. Commenter RDF . . . has championed some popular talking points in today’s intellectual culture. We can therefore pick up from a […]
REFERENCE: The Smith Model, an architecture for cybernetics and mind-body/ free will/ determinism/ compatibilism analysis . . .
|June 4, 2013||Posted by kairosfocus under Animal minds, Atheism, Cybernetics and Mechatronics, Evolutionary psychology, Human evolution, ID Foundations, Neuroscience, Science, worldview issues/foundations and society|
Since the issue of agent freedom and cause has again come up, it is worth the while to post the following summary on the Smith Model for agent cause and cybernetics, from the IOSE unit on minds etc: __________ >>(c) Of neurons, brains and minds The neuron (in its various types) is the key building […]
|May 30, 2013||Posted by kairosfocus under Cosmology, Fine tuning, ID Foundations, Multiverse, Origin Of Life, Video|
WK has pointed out a vid sequence at YouTube, in which Dr Gonzalez lays out a good summary of the privileged planet thesis. Here is the start: embedded by Embedded VideoYouTube Direkt WK (what, you haven’t bookmarked and speed-dialled this blog yet? tut, tut! . . . ) summarises on points of significance for reflection: […]
The ghost of William Paley says his piece in reply to Darwin and successors, on the commonly dismissed “watch found in the field” argument
Over at the KF blog, we have recently been entertaining some ghosts from our civilisation’s past, who are concerned about its present and now sadly likely future in light of the sad history recorded in Acts 27, of a sea voyage to Rome gone disastrously wrong because the voyagers were manipulated into venturing back out […]
We can see this by thinking of a common metaphor that used to be used at popular level to promote the notion that any contrivance we can come up with would, given enough time and resources, also be achievable by chance. Namely, a million or more monkeys at typewriters. Even for the equivalent of just 73 ASCII characters, this already fails, as we just saw. Not enough time or resources by a very long musket-shot.
Some have done the exercise by computer, and this is the result so far:
One computer program run by Dan Oliver of Scottsdale, Arizona, according to an article in The New Yorker, came up with a result on August 4, 2004: After the group had worked for 42,162,500,000 billion billion monkey-years, one of the “monkeys” typed,
“VALENTINE. Cease toIdor:eFLP0FRjWK78aXzVOwm)-‘;8.t”
The first 19 letters of this sequence can be found in “The Two Gentlemen of Verona”. Other teams have reproduced 18 characters from “Timon of Athens”, 17 from “Troilus and Cressida”, and 16 from “Richard II”.
A website entitled The Monkey Shakespeare Simulator, launched on July 1, 2003, contained a Java applet that simulates a large population of monkeys typing randomly, with the stated intention of seeing how long it takes the virtual monkeys to produce a complete Shakespearean play from beginning to end. For example, it produced this partial line from Henry IV, Part 2, reporting that it took “2,737,850 million billion billion billion monkey-years” to reach 24 matching characters:
- RUMOUR. Open your ears; 9r”5j5&?OWTY Z0d…
In short, dismal and predictable failure.
If life came about by universal common descent, it is patent that the best explanation of even such is that it did so by design, not by the blind and utterly inadequate mechanisms being proposed.
Why is all of this important to rescuing a civilisation at the brink?
Because, first, there is an issue of truth and genuine knowledge at stake. Tha tis worth the effort in itself.
However, it is also the case that evolutionary materialism — which ever has the tendencies Plato pointed out — has been held to be warranted by science and to be proved thereby. Never mind the sort of ideological question-begging we saw Mr Lewontin and the NSTA exposing for all with eyes to see and ears to hear, to take note of and understand.
Prof William Provine of Cornell helps us further see why this is vital. In the 1998 University of Tennessee Darwin Day keynote, he observed
Naturalistic evolution has clear consequences that Charles Darwin understood perfectly. 1) No gods worth having exist; 2) no life after death exists; 3) no ultimate foundation for ethics exists; 4) no ultimate meaning in life exists; and 5) human free will is nonexistent . . . .
The first 4 implications are so obvious to modern naturalistic evolutionists that I will spend little time defending them. Human free will, however, is another matter. Even evolutionists have trouble swallowing that implication. I will argue that humans are locally determined systems that make choices. They have, however, no free will . . . [[Evolution: Free Will and Punishment and Meaning in Life, Second Annual Darwin Day Celebration Keynote Address, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, February 12, 1998 (abstract).]
I must thank this gentleman for his candour, however, I cannot praise him for his line of reasoning.
If we have no freedom of mind and volition, we cannot choose to follow or accept a reasonable case. This is already self-referential and self-refuting. For, rationality itself is here undermined.
Moreover, the foundation for morality is eroded, and we are left playthings of our impulses and our manipulators. All, thanks to an imposition before the actual facts are allowed to speak, under pretence of being a suitably skeptical and successful definition of science. That opens the door to nihilism and to domination by the ruthless, by manipulation at first then by naked force.
And yet, all of this pivots on a begging of the question, not on ay genuinely decisive findings of fact about the origins of life and of the cosmos that supports life.
Law professor Philip Johnson, in rebutting professor Lewontin, was apt:
For scientific materialists the materialism comes first; the science comes thereafter. [[Emphasis original] We might more accurately term them “materialists employing science.” And if materialism is true, then some materialistic theory of evolution has to be true simply as a matter of logical deduction, regardless of the evidence. That theory will necessarily be at least roughly like neo-Darwinism, in that it will have to involve some combination of random changes and law-like processes capable of producing complicated organisms that (in Dawkins’ words) “give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose.”. . . . The debate about creation and evolution is not deadlocked . . . Biblical literalism is not the issue. The issue is whether materialism and rationality are the same thing. Darwinism is based on an a priori commitment to materialism, not on a philosophically neutral assessment of the evidence. Separate the philosophy from the science, and the proud tower collapses. [[Emphasis added.] [[The Unraveling of Scientific Materialism, First Things, 77 (Nov. 1997), pp. 22 – 25.]
Paley concluded: that is obviously correct, and it marks a good point to pause and reflect as we sip.>>
So, we have the ghost of William Paley speaking.
And rightly so, we must ask why it is that we hardly ev er hear of the thought exercise that begins his second chapter in discussions of his watch argument.
Is it the case that much of the exchange on this point has been about a strawman caricature all along?
We need to reflect on that.
As well as, on his words that the watch argument applies to the cosmos as a whole too, now that we have strong reason to believe it is fine tuned in such a way as facilitates Carbon Chemistry, aqueous medium cell based life. END
PS: The continuing series of ghostly visits is here:
Some ghosts from our civilisation’s past have a few words for us . . .
- “Post-birth abortion”? The ghosts of Francis Schaeffer and C Everett Koop have some choice words (and a vid series) for us
- Given developments like “post-birth abortion,” NT Apostles and friends come by for a visit and a chat –John the Baptist and Pilate open the batting
- James the Just gives a captain’s knock from James 3 on the power of the tongue
- The Belize incident, liberty & justice vs manipulative factions, Geo Washington’s farewell address, the gospel and true enlightenment
- Godel, Morison and Greenleaf, with a sidelight from Francis Schaeffer — worldview foundations for restoring our civilisation to sanity
- Plato, Socrates, Paley — and Steve Jobs’ latest project — as we learn to put first things (and first causes) first
- (WIP, more to come . . . )