RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (1000) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   
  Topic: Official Uncommonly Dense Discussion Thread< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Posts: 2716
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 31 2007,16:18   

Just to complete the thought above.

Crandaddy: † † † † † † † † † † †
Why oh why do people think that mechanism is so necessary to design detection? Why canít they see that minds donít operate by any mechanism that we can understand and that mechanism resides in the absence of design.

The term "design" has several meanings, including "to plan". But the claim of Intelligent Design isn't merely that the Designer had a thought, but that the Designer manipulated biology. And this requires a mechanism. And the mechanism connects the Designer with his creation.

As with all sciences which detect "design", we compare the specific instance to known cases, and attempt to link the perpetrator, his motives and modus operandi, with the crime. The most fundamental principle of forensics is that "Every contact leaves a trace". If biology is an ID-machine, then we seek evidence of the mechanism and the nature of the mechanic.

† Perpetrator, method, crime.
† Mechanic, mechanism, machine.
† Artisan, art, artifact.

Proudly banned three four five times by Uncommon Descent.
There is only one Tard. The Tard is One.

  29999 replies since Jan. 16 2006,11:43 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (1000) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   

Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]