Re: MD Hume, Paley and Intelligent Design

From: Arlo J. Bensinger (ajb102@psu.edu)
Date: Sat Apr 30 2005 - 20:03:48 BST

  • Next message: Platt Holden: "RE: MD Quality and the Nuremberg-Tokyo Tribunals"

    [Arlo previously]
    ... So although it is pre-semiotic experience on the infants part, it is still
    experience to culturally valued sensations.

    [Platt]
    > Yes, to some extent, no doubt. The point I would make is that the capacity to
    express preferences is an intrinsic property of static patterns, from inorganic
    on up, and this capacity is characteristic of consciousness.

    [Arlo]
    Agree. But... maybe its this word, "consciousness", that's bothering me. To me,
    "consciousness" implies "identity awareness", that is to be conscious something
    has to have an awareness of "I am". It doesn't have to be a symbolic awareness,
    as I'd say my dog (for example) has some awareness that he is distinct from the
    sofa he is sleeping on, even if he lacks a symbolic "I am" in this awareness.
    But this a gray area for me, one I have not fully thought out, so I'm not
    making any claims, just telling you what the word implies to me at this point
    in my thinking.

    Anyways, when you say that the capacity to express preferences, from inorganic
    on up, is a characteristic of consciousness, that's where I stop and think
    "does a quartz crystal have 'consciousness'"? Does an amoeba? Does a planet
    repsonding to inorganic quality we call "the law of gravity"? This is why I
    questioned the use of "conscious designer" in your support of ID. It implies an
    aspect of cognition, consciousness- I am, that I don't personally ascribe to
    Pirsig's Quality.

    Your thoughts?

    [Arlo previously]
    Maybe a little. You are saying that patterns (inorganic) emerged following
    the Big Bang are a result of the DQ force? I would agree with this

    [Platt]
    > Yes. And also that the DQ force created the Big Bang..

    [Arlo]
    Agree. Although... to be honest, I'm on the fence with the whole Big Bang thing.
    I read Hawking's "Brief History" and I like the idea of our "universe" being
    described as a "bubble" (possibley blown out of the end of a black hole in some
    other universe) in a swirling sea of bubbles. But, of course, this just backs
    up the discussion one level. And I am no Hawking expert to really support or
    defend (or perhaps even understand) what he argues. But, regardless, yes, DQ
    was the creating force.

    [Arlo previously]
    Then you say that the value experiences we have suggest a larger design? I
    think this is where I am getting confused, maybe because I'm not sure what you
    mean by "if you believe patterns are designs"?

    [Platt]
    > To me a pattern is synonymous with a design, like the Merriam-Webster
    > dictionary says in defining "pattern:" "4) an artistic, musical, literary or
    mechanical design or form." (Note the aesthetic connotation that fits nicely
    with Pirsig's attraction to high quality harmony.)

    [Arlo]
    That makes sense. I think the trouble I have with "design" is that it is used
    often to imply an external "conscious designer", and given what I said above
    about my interpretation of "conscious", I think that's where I get stopped. To
    say that we see a pattern, or a design, and say this pattern is attributable to
    DQ, I have no problems with.

    But to say that we see a pattern, or a design, and say this pattern is
    attributable to a conscious designer, does not sound right to me.

    [Platt]
    > But, referring to your point about "conceptualizations" above, I guess we
    should bear in mind that patterns and designs are conceptualizations, too.

    [Arlo]
    Yes, see, this is where I have problems accepting "design" as "proof of a
    "conscious designer". Patterns and designs "do not exist", we sort them and
    give them names and recognize them as "patterns", but I don't believe them to
    be anything more than conceptualizations we use to describe quality (whether
    inorganic, biological, social or intellectual). Of course, like I said, this is
    an area where I am only thinking through things, so my statements are presented
    here only as "thinking outloud", not definitive statements of belief.

    Arlo

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Apr 30 2005 - 22:45:59 BST