Joined: Oct. 2005
|Quote (evopeach @ Oct. 20 2005,14:47)|
A limited number of options (usually two) is given, while in reality there are more options. A false dilemma is an illegitimate use of the "or" operator.
Putting issues or opinions into "black or white" terms is a common instance of this fallacy
Evolutionists say either the universe, life etc. are all the result of natural law driven phenomena or they are driven by supernatural interventionist acts that are purely and wholly expressions of religion.
From this they conclude that no science can ever be assumed valid because if the supernatural is permitted a result cannot be relied upon as repeatable and dependable because it would be indistinguishable whether the result was obtained scientifically or as a direct result of supernatural intervention.
Given the concept of ID there is in fact a third scientific choice:
At an undefined point in time an Intelligent Designer hybridized intellect, power and ability onto matter resulting in the design in life that we observe as well as the operation of the universe. Past that point the ID has intervened in the universe only rarely and in general has been content to let the universe operate within the boundaries of physical law.
The problem with your "one time" defense, Peach, is that you can't provide any observable data about when and if such a "one time" event will happen again. And in the absense of such data, you can't be sure that when you walk out of your front door tomorrow morning you won't rise from the earth as if touched by his noodly appendage! Therefor, nothing you can know about science is reliable because any unexpected or non-intuitive result can be just another case of the Intelligent Designer mucking up the words... again.
It may well be that God mucks up the works with some regularity, but science must proceed on the assumption that he does not.