Arguments about God

[GioD]

Hardly,because that is exactly what science finds true, and ti's you theists who beg the question of that teleology as Carneades eons ago noted!

No, science was definitionally excluded from analyzing final causes when its principles were designed. The Moderns also tried to get rid of teleology philosophically, and while many people now reject final causes they don't realize medicine (among other fields) is dependent on teleology. Maybe you'll complain that medicine is question-begging too.

T'is something that theists ever accuse anyone else of begging questions,because " Logic is the bane of theists." [/I]

That's obviously not question-begging.

[Griggsy]

Hardly! You don't fathom those fallacies but as with others you revel projecting them. You cannot overcome the question begging and thus you ever lose with that teleological excrescence!
Medicine hardly rest on teleology! SatantheAlien eloquently eviscerates that sophistry! Were matters teleological none would do experiments due to the same results everytime, and that teleology is backwards causation.

[SatanTheAlien]

Giod, we agree that objects serve a purpose, like a heart pumps blood. It is clear that is its primary function, but this doesn't fit the philosophical implications or defintion of teleology that I understand. When I say a heart has a function, I do not mean that a heart came to exist to serve that function. These are different ideas. I do not believe the heart came into existence to serve the function of pumping blood. It just happened to be that through evolution, little steps at a time, such an organ as a heart came to exist. It just happens to function as pumping blood. Sort of like an accident. I don't think that fits into teleology.

However, we humans do design things with an end purpose of function in mind, and that thing was designed by us to serve that function, so in that way teleology is real.

[GioD]

Hardly! You don't fathom those fallacies but as with others you revel projecting them.

Look who's talking!

You cannot overcome the question begging and thus you ever lose with that teleological excrescence!

Less thesaurus, more Aristotelian books.

Medicine hardly rest on teleology!

Medicine presupposes our body parts have a way they ought to be.

SatantheAlien eloquently eviscerates that sophistry!

SatantheAlien conceded organs have functions.

Were matters teleological none would do experiments due to the same results everytime, and that teleology is backwards causation.

Teleology is built in to something's structure. It's not the case of reversed causation but rightly ordered causation with a purpose.

[GioD]

It is clear that is its primary function, but this doesn't fit the philosophical implications or defintion of teleology that I understand.

As we're going to see, that definition is almost certainly not accurate or outdated.

When I say a heart has a function, I do not mean that a heart came to exist to serve that function.

Teleology doesn't say this! All teleology says is that things have goal-directness. That doesn't mean their origins were goal directed - though that is a defensible notion - just that their current states are goal-directed.

[robertb]

As we're going to see, that definition is almost certainly not accurate or outdated.



Teleology doesn't say this! All teleology says is that things have goal-directness. That doesn't mean their origins were goal directed - though that is a defensible notion - just that their current states are goal-directed.

How is that significantly distinct from drawing a bullseye around the place your dart landed?

[GioD]

How is that significantly distinct from drawing a bullseye around the place your dart landed?

Because it has the same implications regardless of whether you exclude teleology to imply purpose in evolution or if you use it in the sense I am.

[robertb]

Because it has the same implications regardless of whether you exclude teleology to imply purpose in evolution or if you use it in the sense I am.

Perhaps you can clarify your answer. It seems like it may be an equivocation.

[GioD]

Perhaps you can clarify your answer. It seems like it may be an equivocation.

Regardless of whether or not teleology evolved the way it did, the mere fact that some things are goal-directed (our heart's goal is to pump blood) implies an intentionality behind them. This intentionality must be borne by an intellect who directs teleology. Regardless of how our organs came to be, the fact they have functions at all implies intentionality.

[robertb]

Regardless of whether or not teleology evolved the way it did, the mere fact that some things are goal-directed (our heart's goal is to pump blood) implies an intentionality behind them. This intentionality must be borne by an intellect who directs teleology. Regardless of how our organs came to be, the fact they have functions at all implies intentionality.

Yes that is what I thought you said the first time, leaving my dart/bullseye question standing. Not only that, but your answer may suggest a misunderstanding concerning an aspect of the theory of evolution on your part, or at least an attempt to improperly shoehorn it into a quasi-design argument.

[GioD]

Yes that is what I thought you said the first time, leaving my dart/bullseye question standing. Not only that, but your answer may suggest a misunderstanding concerning an aspect of the theory of evolution on your part, or at least an attempt to improperly shoehorn it into a quasi-design argument.

None of my argument is dependent on God actually physically designing us. It's based around his sustenance of nature itself, which includes teleology. Sustenance =/= design.

[robertb]

None of my argument is dependent on God actually physically designing us. It's based around his sustenance of nature itself, which includes teleology. Sustenance =/= design.

I am still unclear that "sustenance" = directedness, even if I grant "sustenance" for the sake of your point. Teleology refers to some sort of final cause, which the ToE contradicts.

[GioD]

I am still unclear that "sustenance" = directedness, even if I grant "sustenance" for the sake of your point.

God sustains nature which is goal-directed, we can know God does this based on what goal-directedness implies.

Teleology refers to some sort of final cause, which the ToE contradicts.

How does the theory of evolution contradict this? And a final cause is just goal-directedness.

[robertb]

God sustains nature which is goal-directed, we can know God does this based on what goal-directedness implies.



How does the theory of evolution contradict this? And a final cause is just goal-directedness.

You assert goal directedness. ToE denies goal directedness by definition. This isthe point I have been repeating. You can not have this cake and eat it to.

That you ask me how evolution contradicts directedness merely confirms my suspicion of a flaw in your understanding of the ToE. What you are arguing is a form of ID, since as soon as you insert intent, that is what you have. Evolution via random mutation and natural selection denies intent period. The metaphysical concept of final causality is rejected

[GioD]

You assert goal directedness. ToE denies goal directedness by definition. This isthe point I have been repeating. You can not have this cake and eat it to.

That you ask me how evolution contradicts directedness merely confirms my suspicion of a flaw in your understanding of the ToE. What you are arguing is a form of ID, since as soon as you insert intent, that is what you have. Evolution via random mutation and natural selection denies intent period. The metaphysical concept of final causality is rejected

The only reason evolution denies goal-directedness is because it was founded on premises that deny final causes. Appealing to empirical science to refute final causation is question-begging. Second I clearly stated that even if we evolved the way we are randomly that still doesn't remove teleology. Goal-directedness is found in various organs, for instance the heart. It doesn't matter how or if the heart evolved, it still ought to pump blood and this is an example of teleology.