Re: [asa] Innate design detector?

*It helps us understand why some detect 'design' in biology even
though there is a considerable risk of false positives*.

No it doesn't, because it gives us no criteria for sifting true positives
from false positives.

On 11/1/06, Pim van Meurs <pimvanmeurs@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> It helps us understand why some detect 'design' in biology even
> though there is a considerable risk of false positives. The question
> of purpose in biology may always remain an open question as it is
> presently based on our ignorance and unless we manage to learn more,
> there will always be issues where we lack knowledge and are quick to
> jump to design conclusions, as this is our innate tendency.
>
> Remember that Dembski argued that the presence of false positives in
> inferring design would render his approach useless.
> Nevertheless, this innate tendency may help explain such things as
> superstition, alien landings, etc. Who does not remember watching the
> clouds pass by and seeing 'designs'.
> So if we are hard wired to detect design, especially when we lack
> additional explanations, then I see this as a very relevant issue
> even to our so called design as some claim has been detected in for
> instance biology.
>
>
> On Nov 1, 2006, at 10:35 AM, David Opderbeck wrote:
>
> > The paper doesn't seem terribly interesting. We're hard-wired to
> > infer purpose from certain perceptual patterns; sometimes our
> > inferences are correct, sometimes they're not. Whether the
> > perception of purpose in biology is a correct inference is an open
> > question. So what?
> >
>
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Nov 1 15:03:26 2006