DIYbanter - View Single Post

wrote:

Tim Daneliuk wrote:

...

This is not exactly right. *Some* Intelligent Design theories are proposed
as an alternative to Evolutionary Theory. There are however other
"intelligent design" theories (aka "authorship theories") that posit the
existence of an intelligent creator that operated *by means of evolution*.

Can you state a testable hypothesis that can be used to discriminate
between the operation of evolution by an intelligent creator, and
the operation of evolution without an intelligent creator?

No, probably not. But I can offer a rational conjecture that Something
has never been demonstrated to spring forth from Nothing and this
suggests that there is an authoring "Something". (This nothwithstanding
the particle argument someone else put forth earlier in the threat. This
is a conjurer's trick - the particles in question spring forth from
something - the context of the larger universe and the physics that
govern it). Moreover, even if the mechanism *is* entirely governed by
natural selection, the open question still remains: How did the laws of
physics that ultimately enable natural selection to even operate ever
come to be?

Incidentally, I don't think you can actually propose a testable
hypothesis that demonstrates full-blown evolution. The whole evolution
theory cannon be experimentally verified. Beyond the base mechanisms of
evolution (mutation, natural selection, et al) the "Big Picture" of
evolution is arrived at by means of inferrence and induction. These are
valid methods of science, but they are not, strictly speaking, testable.
IOW, you can test the pieces, but not the whole of evolutionary theory.
In fact, honest science always says, "This is our best theory ... *so far* "
in recognition of the limits of what you can "know" by induction or
inference.

This whole discussion is difficult because it has both a philosophical/
metaphysical component and a scientific component to it. The Science
community is mute on the metaphysics (to its detriment) and most of the
"author" theories like ID and Creationism do not do a good job of
separating the portions of their positions that are metaphysics and
which are claimed science. I think there is an really important "middle"
where these two communities should be meeting and talking to develop a
common language and point of departure for the discussion.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/