Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Sculptor1]

The Argument from design has been rendered invalid by Darwin.

[Mans]

Excuse me Sculptor1

Darwin did mistake. He was in a branch of materialism that did a great mistake in his hypothesis, just like Karl Marx and Lenin who originated Socialism and communism doctrines. Their great wrongs were revealed in the recent decades with the collapse of Soviet governing system.

Now, communism can be seen in the museums!

[Sculptor1]

Excuse me Sculptor1

Darwin did mistake. He was in a branch of materialism that did a great mistake in his hypothesis, just like Karl Marx and Lenin who originated Socialism and communism doctrines. Their great wrongs were revealed in the recent decades with the collapse of Soviet governing system.

Now, communism can be seen in the museums!

ROTFL
Such many ignoramuses, so little time!

[Terrapin Station]

LOL But everywhere I look there is evidence for the opposite.

Such as?

[Terrapin Station]

This is one of the countless intelligent designs of God . . .

It's an "intelligent design" based on?

[Mans]

knowledge and inerrant prediction

[Sculptor1]

This is one of the countless intelligent designs of God . . .

It's an "intelligent design" based on?

Based on the fact that Darwin was a communist!!

[Mans]

I didn't say, Darwin was communist but I put him beside Marx and Lenin as a person with a materialism tendency.

[Sculptor1]

I didn't say, Darwin was communist but I put him beside Marx and Lenin as a person with a materialism tendency.

The entire world has a materialist tendency. Science is based on a materialist tendency.
What you did was the most childish attempt to discredit a perfectly workable scientific method, which you do not understand, by associating it with something else you do not understand.

[Felix]

Sculptor1: "The Argument from design has been rendered invalid by Darwin."

If I'm not mistaken, Darwin was a Deist, i.e., he believed that a Supreme Intelligence planted the tree of evolution, but not that He tended it thereafter - nurtured it's growth. But design is only apparent to those capable of recognizing it, e.g., an ant is a poor judge of landscape design.

[Mans]

My interpretation of materialism was -absolute materialism- that goes back to disbelief in God that is atheism.

I myself am a researcher in sciences, technology and philosophy. So, I don't reject logical and scientific things.

Darwin established the belief of evolution of the nature and beings apart from a creator who originated the world based on logic and science. Logic that is relative to science says us, every regularity and order implies to an intelligent operator. ِ

Darwin deny this axiom and offer this philosophy that the nature and the beings in it are included a continuous evolution autonomously. This philosophy is opposite to the axiom that says the regularity and orders in the objects is not accidentally and every regularity needs an intelligent regulator.

[evolution]

LOL But everywhere I look there is evidence for the opposite.

Such as?

Do you not understand the word 'everywhere'?

From thee Universe Itself to absolutely every other single individual thing.

[Terrapin Station]

Such as?

Do you not understand the word 'everywhere'?

From thee Universe Itself to absolutely every other single individual thing.

So a sock for example?

[evolution]

Do you not understand the word 'everywhere'?

From thee Universe Itself to absolutely every other single individual thing.

So a sock for example?

Is a sock a single individual thing to you?

If yes, then yes. As I said, From thee Universe Itself to absolutely every other single individual thing.

[Terrapin Station]

So a sock for example?

Is a sock a single individual thing to you?

If yes, then yes. As I said, From thee Universe Itself to absolutely every other single individual thing.

So how is a sock evidence for God?