How much do we know? Part 3

[leov]

Antony Flew interview after conversion.

 

[Bear Wild]

Antony Flew interview after conversion.

Oh no, not another silly interview about how complexity cannot be explained in the natural world. Opinion and only opinion in face of the evidence that the natural world is more than capable of complex design. No evidence to show that nature is not capable. Just because we have not explained every detail of each process does not mean that we do not have evidence of how it progresses. I suspect he is not up to date based on what he is saying and the whole interview does not present a balanced information.
So here we go again - "it is so complicated and only humans are capable designing things since we make computers" type argument. Or we cannot yet explain it so it must be made by a god - the same god that moves the sun over us from east to west.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Oh no, not another silly interview about how complexity cannot be explained in the natural world. Opinion and only opinion in face of the evidence that the natural world is more than capable of complex design. No evidence to show that nature is not capable. Just because we have not explained every detail of each process does not mean that we do not have evidence of how it progresses. I suspect he is not up to date based on what he is saying and the whole interview does not present a balanced information.
So here we go again - "it is so complicated and only humans are capable designing things since we make computers" type argument. Or we cannot yet explain it so it must be made by a god - the same god that moves the sun over us from east to west.

True. And what do we know about complex design at the offset?

Universe has been naturally doing this for and uncalculated amount of time.

No God required.

 

[gnostic]

Quite frankly, I don’t bother with any professional modern philosopher, regardless if they personally follow atheism, theism, deism, or any other -ism, or whether they are religious or not, because I have better things to do then listen philosophers. I especially despised metaphysicians.

Bunch of biased wind-bags who over-complicate everything.

Don’t want to waste my time on YouTube videos, from contemporary philosophers lecturing me what they think.

And I am certainly not going to waste my time on Antony Flew, regardless if he was an atheist or now a deist.

 

[leov]

Quite frankly, I don’t bother with any professional modern philosopher, regardless if they personally follow atheism, theism, deism, or any other -ism, or whether they are religious or not, because I have better things to do then listen philosophers. I especially despised metaphysicians.

Bunch of biased wind-bags who over-complicate everything.

Don’t want to waste my time on YouTube videos, from contemporary philosophers lecturing me what they think.

And I am certainly not going to waste my time on Antony Flew, regardless if he was an atheist or now a deist.

I would have if I were you, but it is just my opinion.

 

[ecco]

I would have if I were you, but it is just my opinion.

Since you started a thread about him and recommend viewing his video, I'm sure that you can write a synopsis, in your own words, of his views and beliefs.

Nah!

 

[leov]

Since you started a thread about him and recommend viewing his video, I'm sure that you can write a synopsis, in your own words, of his views and beliefs.

Nah!

My rule is to keep synopsis minimal. I am not selling anything, if you interested you can get your own synopsis. It is a Gnostic way.

 

[ratiocinator]

The whole complexity argument is comical. No matter how mysterious, complex, and inexplicable you think the physical world is, any god would be even more mysterious, complex, and inexplicable. It's childish storytelling, not an explanation, or anything that can be sensibly deduced from the evidence.

That's quite apart from the fact that biological complexity has a perfectly good explanation, it's called natural selection.

 

[leov]

The whole complexity argument is comical. No matter how mysterious, complex, and inexplicable you think the physical world is, any god would be even more mysterious, complex, and inexplicable. It's childish storytelling, not an explanation, or anything that can be sensibly deduced from the evidence.

That's quite apart from the fact that biological complexity has a perfectly good explanation, it's called natural selection.

World is delusional about how much they really know and understand,,,

 

[ratiocinator]

World is delusional about how much they really know and understand,,,

Ant is basking in the sun.

Is this a random phrase game?

 

[leov]

Ant is basking in the sun.

Is this a random phrase game?

Sun is good, light is good, ant is good, why not?

 

[ecco]

Since you started a thread about him and recommend viewing his video, I'm sure that you can write a synopsis, in your own words, of his views and beliefs.

Nah!

My rule is to keep synopsis minimal. I am not selling anything, if you interested you can get your own synopsis. It is a Gnostic way.

So, either...
You don't know enough about your subject to write about it
-or-
You are too lazy to spend some time supporting your views.
-or-
Both of the above.

Probably the latter.

 

[leov]

So, either...
You don't know enough about your subject to write about it
-or-
You are too lazy to spend some time supporting your views.
-or-
Both of the above.

Probably the latter.

you chose, I do not care - it is only short video to invest in, but some is rather look for ed hominem things, I noticed no discussion of the video itself.

 

[ecco]

you chose, I do not care - it is only short video to invest in, but some is rather look for ed hominem things, I noticed no discussion of the video itself.

I don't watch videos posted by people who do not understand the topic themselves. Why should I?

 

[gnostic]

you chose, I do not care - it is only short video to invest in, but some is rather look for ed hominem things, I noticed no discussion of the video itself.

If this is really your attitude, then why you are bringing up this lame thread in the first place.

You posted a video in the OP, but expressed nothing other than the thread title. This is debate forum, where discussion, debate or argument take place.

The OP is a lousy piece of sh### if you have nothing to offer other than you subject title and video.

As to Flew, he is philosopher, who converted, which mean absolutely nothing, because he isn't a scientist, and the subject he covered Intelligent Design ( ID) or Irreducible Complexity (IC) aren’t science, because they are both pseudoscience.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

My rule is to keep synopsis minimal

A general rule of netiquette, is that you don't just post a video with no explanation.
At minimum, you could summarize the main points in a sentence or 2, 3.

It's not hard. It's basic manners on an internet discussion forum.