• Ed Lonegan
    2
    Given that there are only two possibilities of human origins -- either human life is the result of some intelligent design or it is not (ie. a random phenomenon, best explained by science), what is this surety's effect upon any coherent, consistent philosophy.
  • Ed Lonegan
    2
    I noticed that post within minutes of mine already have pages of responses. Guess I stumped the entire forum. Or, in the words of the immortal Bea Arthur, responding to Mel Brooks, who stated that his profession was a stand-up philosopher, Ms. Arthur stated "oh you're a bullshitter.
  • Pantagruel
    1k
    Maybe because your proposition seems to be substantive, but isn't, as it is open-ended. Either A is true, or not-A is true. But not-A could be B, or C, or D, or E.... Not being the result of intelligent design could actually be any number of interesting things.....
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.