• royalbarnacle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Religion’s weakest argument is the claim that the world was intelligently designed. When it so clearly isn’t.

    Simulation theory doesn’t claim someone designed all this. They built a simulator where all this evolution and history happened, like emergent gameplay on steroids. It’s not the same kind of “design” we’re talking about.

    • rwhitisissle@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Intelligent design is a broad, vague, and intensely mutable concept. It isn’t helped by the fact that there’s multiple kinds, with the pseudoscientific kind touted by the religious right in America and the more generic, very fucking old “teleological argument” which is also intelligent design at its core. To give a specific example of intelligent design philosophy that isn’t directly tied to a belief in a deity as an active participant, you can look at the deists, who believed that the universe’s fundamental laws were engineered by a kind of “clock maker” deity who left the universe running under its own principles but doesn’t have a direct, guiding hand in individual events. This is still a form of “intelligent design” and closely corresponds to simulation theory. At this point, you are redefining terms to suite your argument. Also, you can’t really say the world is or is not intelligently designed, as you have no evidence for either. The only truly “logical” position to hold for any of this is straight agnosticism.