Joined: Mar. 2005
If the end result is some measure of clarity, even if only for myself, then I would not count the time wasted. And given your concern, I appreciate your reply.
The unity of life is an evidence for (i.e., confirmed prediction of) common descent. Is it equally an evidence for common design?
To this question you object:
|Without some constraint upon the "designer" that supposedly is behind "common design," I don't see any sensible way to derive "predictions" from the concept.|
Let's return to the example of the artist. I stated that "It is a reasonable prediction that works [by a common artist] will share a basic structural similarity that differentiates them from works by other artists." Do you disagree? If so, on what basis does the expert attribute works to artists (cf. handwriting experts, philologists, etc.)?
I do not deny that an artist could, for whatever reason, produce radically dissimilar works, but that would be abnormal in some objective sense of abnormal, i.e., it is usually the case that works by the same artist are similar. Otherwise, the notion of a work being characteristic of an artist would be incoherent, and it clearly is not.