Search
-
Recent Posts
- Divided we stand 09/03/2024
- The Pauli Principle 08/03/2024
- All flesh is grass 27/02/2024
- Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar… 23/02/2024
- Spot the clots 19/02/2024
Recent Comments
- Jon Garvey on Divided we stand
- Colin Chambers on Divided we stand
- Jon Garvey on Divided we stand
- Colin Chambers on Divided we stand
- Jon Garvey on Divided we stand
Post Archive
Daily Archives: 18/04/2017
How did he do that?
The commonest rejoinder to any design argument in nature, you will no doubt have noticed, is “Who’s the designer, then?” Although the ID reply is actually perfectly rational – that inference to design cannot, intrinsically, tell one the nature of the designer in detail – the question is in reality just an over-elaborate, if hackneyed, attempt to show that there is a hidden agenda of religion which, once uncovered, would render design unscientific in principle and, probably, a threat to the body politic. It’s Catch 22 – stick with methodological naturalism and design is deceitful creationism: mention God in reply to the question and it’s an illegitimate insertion into science.
Posted in Creation, Philosophy, Science, Theology
Leave a comment