Search
-
Recent Posts
- Ideology is reliably replicable 07/11/2025
- My books on the cheap! 05/11/2025
- There are only two truths 03/11/2025
- Researching the rise of Pentecostalism in the UK 31/10/2025
- A time for everything 26/10/2025
Recent Comments
- Jon Garvey on Surreality and Messianism
- Levi on Surreality and Messianism
- Jon Garvey on A time for everything
- Jon Garvey on Hitting the Books
- Peter Hickman on Hitting the Books
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