= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Bugmaster comments on The Wonder of Evolution - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (80)
Sure, that is possible. Then, in the absence of overwhelming evidence for a designer, we have at least two possible explanations for the evidence that we do possess:
1). Cellular replication in general and DNA in particular is a result of natural processes, specifically {insert long explanation here}.
2). Cellular replication in general and DNA in particular is a result of both natural processes, as well as supernatural intervention by an intelligent designer for whose existence we have no evidence.
Which explanation is more likely to be true, Bayesically speaking (yes I know that's not a word) ?
I don't think you need to invoke any sort of Bayesian issues there. Just ask which is simpler. You also are going one step ahead of what is necessary because as far as I can tell, Ghazzali isn't even ok with theistic evolution.
I want to taboo the word "simpler", because its meaning is vague. "God did it" is certainly a simpler statement than "Here, read this 500-page biology textbook and find out".
I think my example still applies, though. Ultimately, we still have purely physical things like fossils, DNA molecules, etc. etc.; as far as I understand, Ghazzali doesn't dispute the fact that these items exist, only the conclusions we can draw from their existence.