Continuing the discussion from Brian Miller: Thermodynamics and the Origin of Life:
This a really good paper:
We argue that there is a tension between two types of design arguments the fine-tuning argument (FTA) and the biological design argument (BDA). The tension arises because the strength of each argument is inversely proportional to the value of a certain currently unknown probability.
How this often plays out in conversation is that:
- ID proponent argues that certain structure very improbable to arise, therefore design.
- We show how it is actually not impossibly improbable.
- ID proponent argues now that this just push problem to fine-tuning. therefore design.
We have seen this play on the forums more than once. Most recently with @EricMH. Which makes we wonder if this is a truly absurdist argument. If what ever the likelihood is, then it is design, why even enter into the debate in the first place? Isn’t the design argument much more appropriately expressed as astonishment at the beauty and complexity of life, as we all should be?