tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post474517491827062809..comments2024-03-27T17:15:37.606-04:00Comments on Triablogue: Occam's razorRyanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17809283662428917799noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-30746405070110444602008-04-24T14:20:00.000-04:002008-04-24T14:20:00.000-04:00thnuhthnuh said...“Just wondering - #6 seems frivo...thnuhthnuh said...<BR/><BR/>“Just wondering - #6 seems frivolous, why even include it?”<BR/><BR/>Well, for one thing, there’s a chapter on “Teleological Explanation” in A Companion to the Philosophy of Science (W. H. Newton-Smith, ed.) which raises precisely this conundrum.<BR/><BR/>It even includes the following admission: “Dennett (1987) argued that discerning natural functions always involves tacitly conceiving Nature as a designer” (ibid. 493.<BR/><BR/>“Yeah, yeah, but truth is more important that my feelings and intuitions, which are often mistaken.”<BR/><BR/>Why is truth important in a pointless, amoral universe? <BR/><BR/>“If this is part of that game of chicken, you should retract it.”<BR/><BR/>That’s a moralistic assertion. Do you think I’m obligated to retract the game of chicken? How did you arrive at that value judgment?stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-41377539733295591292008-04-24T13:32:00.000-04:002008-04-24T13:32:00.000-04:00Just wondering - #6 seems frivolous, why even incl...Just wondering - #6 seems frivolous, why even include it? It's 2 different things to say, "the heart is supposed (intended?) to pump blood" and "in order for this person to continue to live, the heart must pump blood", and medicine only cares about the latter.<BR/><BR/>Theists seem to play a game of chicken with the atheist - "come on, deep down, you *feel* there's morality and purpose! You'll have to give it all up!" Yeah, yeah, but truth is more important that my feelings and intuitions, which are often mistaken. If this is part of that game of chicken, you should retract it. You might frighten some pseudo atheist, but you haven't proven anything.<BR/><BR/>I don't even see how it simplifies anything, since we're left wondering why the heart itself was *intended* in the first place, instead of some other method.thnuhthnuhhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07825488332154700881noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-75157600426698447072008-04-24T13:00:00.000-04:002008-04-24T13:00:00.000-04:00Related, here is a brief summary from Angus Menuge...Related, <A HREF="http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/angus-menuge-vs-pz-myers-debate/" REL="nofollow">here</A> is a brief summary from Angus Menuge of a recent debate he had with P.Z. Myers.Patrick Chanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16095377877712197984noreply@blogger.com