>In a message dated 6/6/99 8:57:03 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
Bertvan@aol.com
>writes:
>
>>
>> An Atheist might spend his time
>> trying to create life in the laboratory.
>>
>
>This has already been accomplished.
>
>>
>> A design theorist might look for
>> evidence that life is a common and natural component of the "design"
of
>> the universe.
>>
>
>Those "atheists" who have been able to create life in the lab have also
>learned that life is an inevitable consequence of the self-organization
>capabilities built into the physiochemical laws. In other words, life is
>part of the "design" of the universe. The question then becomes, did this
>design arise naturally or was it the result of intelligent action?
Since self-organization is a consequence of MANY different collections of
laws, not just the ones built into the physics of the Universe, my guess is
that it's accidental. This is also one reason "strong anthropic principle"
arguments are so weak; we have been unable to find any limit on the number
of sets of laws that can yield self-organization.
>>
>> An atheist might see imperfections in nature. A design
>> theorist would look for the purpose behind each of those so-called
>> imperfection. (Death and disease, for instance.)
>>
>
>Again, "atheists" accept that these "imperfections" do have purpose,
because
>their research has demonstrated that. Concepts like death and disease are
>accepted as natural consequences of living systems, and are investigated as
>such, rather than as aberations that must be explained away. In fact, it
is
>the creationist position that death and disease are aberations rather than
>part of natural "design".
Death and disease do not always have a purpose, but they do seem always to
have naturalistic explanations. That is, as Kevin suggests, we can predict,
from the principles of evolution that "organisms" will die and that they
will get diseases, diseases of at least these types: Those from simple
malfunction and degradation, those resulting from "infemes" that have
overall survival value but which have some disease as a side effect, those
resulting from parasitic "infemes," and those caused by other "organisms."
("Infeme" is my term for the information stored in genes, memes,
self-reproducing computer programs, etc. It is a chunk of information
"seeking" to perpetuate itself. Genes are "selfish," as Dawkins says, but
their selfishness is secondary to the selfishness of the infemes they carry
by means of their structure. ALL evolution is PRIMARILY the evolution of
information-survival, or of infeme-survival.) Memes, computer programs, and
genetic organisms, not to mention automobiles, watches, and societies, are
all evolutionary and they can all "die" and they can all get "diseases."
Chris