Deja Vu

It always manages to end up like this, doesn’t it…?


Keep up the good fight, Opus.

And work on your arguments. “Accident” is a bad word choice. There’s an important distinction to be made between random chance playing a role in the very non-random process of evolution.

[tags]Opus, Intelligent Design, Christianity, atheist, atheism[/tags]

  • txatheist

    And I’ve looked for that word. My choice is word is “sequential” but I prefer necessary sequential events.

  • spin sycle

    what about ‘random’?

    i’m sure there’s something better but I can’t think of it right now

  • Richard Wade

    “Random” still sounds like “accidental”, or “chaotic.” That’s a tough one, to put in a single word, “following physical laws and environmental pressures.” I thought of “mindless” to counter “designed” or “on purpose,” but in our current culture that sounds like, “stupid.”
    Now that I think of it, “Intelligent Design” should be called “Stupid Design.” Organisms would never win any design awards. They’re full of unhelpful redundancies and obsolete things they can’t seem to get rid of. An enormous part of the genome appears to be useless “junk,” as the geneticists call it.

  • wrymouth

    A theist would point out that the vast majority of evolutionary models (which were, after all, developed by theists for the most part), and those especially that employ non-random ‘built-in’ processes, are compatible with most models of theism, even of the Christian sort. This naturally excepts those models wherein the universe’s primordial elements, 10 x 10^(-12) seconds after the Big Bang, randomly combined to spell out “THERE IS NO GOD” in Esperanto. But most of those models have been discredited, no?

    I think the ‘atheist/theist’ battle has to be fought on another front. This is just a battle between ‘scientifically-inclined atheist/scientifically-distrustful Biblical Literalist Christian’ which doesn’t seem, to me, to be too generalizable.

  • Pingback: Edutheria » Blog Archive » ‘Twas created!