[MD] Metaphysics

[markhsmit]

Hi Krimel,
I think the concept of intelligent design depends on the definition
of intelligence.  We have been through this before so I won't 
belabor it, but doesn't the trial and errors and learning that
occurs in evolution represent a form of intelligence?  Semantically
at least?

Thermodynamics is a self-contained system in physics which defines
all terms with reference to each other.  There is no possible way
for it to be wrong.  If I set up a system of definitions, it cannot be
wrong because I make the definitions.  This is similar to the
notions that math cannot be wrong.  Of course it can't.  If I say
The sun is hot, because heat comes from the sun, that can't
be wrong either.

Mark
On Jan 15, 2010, at 11:58:09 AM, Krimel <Krimel at Krimel.com> wrote:
You refuse to acknowledge that the universe is intelligently designed 
because it implies a Creator, yet you are a product of this design and all 
of Science thrives on its order and consistency. I would say there's more 
than a little hypocrisy in your disbelief.

[Krimel]
I reject intelligent design because I don't see the slightest shred of
evidence to support it. Looking at the history of the movement, the
arguments presented, the agendas of those promoting it and the other beliefs
that support and flow from it, I just find it offensive. How is being
offended by ignorance and stupidity hypocritical?

BTW, still waiting for your admission that the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics
presents no problem to the theory of evolution