Friday, August 12, 2011

Intellegent Design Quiz/Survey

I promise I'll get back to Liars for Jesus soon, but first, a quiz from this website (I'd rather you not visit, it's crappy actually.)

1. On a scale of 0 (diehard disbeliever) to 10 (firm believer), how would you rate your level of belief in Intelligent Design? (Minimal Definition of Intelligent Design: The idea that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, and not by an undirected process.)

0

2. What do you regard as the best argument for Intelligent Design?

There is no good argument for intelligent design at this time.

3. What do you regard as the best argument against Intelligent Design?

 See claim CI001.

4. I’d like you to think about the arguments for Intelligent Design. Obviously they’re not perfect. Exactly where do you think these arguments need the most work, to make them more effective?

It is unlikely that a good argument could be constructed. However, such an argument would have to explain all current observations just as well as current science as well as make new, falsifiable predictions.

5. Now I’d like you to think about the arguments against Intelligent Design. Obviously they could be improved. Exactly where do you think these arguments need the most work, to make them more effective?

The claims in CI are damning enough. There is little need to seek more evidence against ID.

6.
(b) If you’re an ID opponent or skeptic, can you name some explanations for life and the cosmos that you would regard as even more irrational than Intelligent Design? (e.g. Everything popped into existence out of absolutely nothing; the future created the past; every logically possible world exists out there somewhere; I am the only being in the cosmos and the external world is an illusion requiring no explanation; only minds are real, so the physical universe is an illusion requiring no explanation.)
Irrationality is not relative. Something is either rational, adhering to the rules of inductive and deductive reasoning, or it is irrational.

Notes on stated possibilities:

Everything popped into existence out of absolutely nothing; - This would be, more or less, the big bang.

the future created the past; - This would violate causality.

every logically possible world exists out there somewhere; - Some interpretations of quantum mechanics imply this.

I am the only being in the cosmos and the external world is an illusion requiring no explanation; only minds are real, so the physical universe is an illusion requiring no explanation. - These are the 'brain-in-a-jar' worlds. While interesting from a philosophical standpoint, they only add complexity to the world and do not change anything about it.