Intelligent Reasoning

Promoting, advancing and defending Intelligent Design via data, logic and Intelligent Reasoning and exposing the theory of evolution as the nonsense it is. I also educate evotards about ID and the theory of evolution one tard at a time and sometimes in groups

Sunday, February 28, 2010

Thorton on design detection

-
This is good.

When I asked blipey How do you think people detect design?, Thorton chimed in with:
Humans do it by pattern matching an unknown object with one that is previously known to be designed, and the designer and mechanism of design / fabrication are previously known also.


For one it isn't an unknown object if we know who designed it and how it was fabricated.

Also is Thorton saying we can only detect design if we previously knew it was designed?

And what happens in unique situations? Scenarios in which we don't have past experience?

Are we supposed to just throw up our hands?

But anyway obviously Thorton doesn't have any investigative experience- pattern matching (a specification BTW) isn't good enough because, as Mikey Shermer puts it, "patternicity"- our ability to see patterns when no pattern is really there.

Also nature is good at producing patterns- so we need to be able to differentiate between the patterns nature produces and teh patterns that require agency involvement.

But observing a pattern is a good start but it is the end. "Looks designed", IMHO, is as good of a reason as any to check further to see if the design is real or illusory.

That is where parsimony comes in. If a designer is not required then we don't infer one regardless of the pattern. Otherwise we would be needing designers for snowflakes.

Back to Thorton- With Stonehenge, for example, we didn't know who or how until well after it was determined to be designed.

That is how it goes- determine design and then figure out the who and how.

If you already know who and how then you don't need to determine design or not.

Humans can generate lightning but that doesn't mean there is a lightning god.

6 Comments:

  • At 11:00 PM, Blogger Thorton said…

    Humans can generate lightning but that doesn't mean there is a lightning god.

    Natural feedback processes like RM+NS can produce complex genomes and created new 'CSI'. That doesn't mean there is a 'CSI' God.

     
  • At 11:52 PM, Blogger Thorton said…

    Back to Thorton- With Stonehenge, for example, we didn't know who or how until well after it was determined to be designed.

    Stonehenge was identified as being human designed because it pattern matched other paleolithic artifacts previously known to be built by humans, using tools, techniques, and materials previously known to be employed by humans, in an area previously known to contain objects designed by humans.

    Where is the previously know specification for a biological object?

     
  • At 6:46 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Natural feedback processes like RM+NS can produce complex genomes and created new 'CSI'.

    And your evidence to support your bald assertion is?

     
  • At 6:47 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Stonehenge was identified as being human designed because it pattern matched other paleolithic artifacts previously known to be built by humans,

    Evidence please.

    You always say things without supporting them.

    Is that how you "debate"?

     
  • At 6:48 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    BTW I am still waiting for you to provide a reference for yout claim about how we detect design.

    It is very telling that you cannot produce anything to support your claim.

     
  • At 7:11 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Also Thorton Stonehenge was first thought to be the work of giants or Merlin weaving his magic.

    It was only through many decades of research did the investigators determine it was humns who built it- and we may never know for sure.

    Also scientists are still working out the "how".

     

Post a Comment

<< Home