Law School Discussion

.

Re: ITT GraphiteDirigible Explains Hume to Us
« Reply #60 on: June 25, 2007, 12:05:54 PM »
Are you saying F cannot be both an object that came about by design and also serve as a model to help us design other objects?

GraphiteDirigible

  • ****
  • 1118
  • Hey there fancypants.
    • View Profile
Re: ITT GraphiteDirigible Explains Hume to Us
« Reply #61 on: June 25, 2007, 12:10:52 PM »
Are you saying F cannot be both an object that came about by design and also serve as a model to help us design other objects?

No, that's a possibility. I'm saying that the evidence you offer cannot reasonably be used to prove design if you have a stronger basis to believe that the similarity is explained by F being the model. Then, "F as model" explains the similarity and you have to find another form of evidence to prove design.

Re: ITT GraphiteDirigible Explains Hume to Us
« Reply #62 on: June 25, 2007, 12:14:13 PM »
Quote
I'm saying that the evidence you offer cannot reasonably be ...

I've offered no evidence. I've put forth a rule for detecting design. There seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding at work here.

GraphiteDirigible

  • ****
  • 1118
  • Hey there fancypants.
    • View Profile
Re: ITT GraphiteDirigible Explains Hume to Us
« Reply #63 on: June 25, 2007, 12:36:34 PM »
Quote
I'm saying that the evidence you offer cannot reasonably be ...

I've offered no evidence. I've put forth a rule for detecting design. There seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding at work here.

Evidence I refer to == Similarities between A and F

Re: ITT GraphiteDirigible Explains Hume to Us
« Reply #64 on: June 25, 2007, 05:09:38 PM »
I am not comparing A to F.