Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AncientGlory" data-source="post: 7094585" data-attributes="member: 262433">Why watch maker argument does not make senseDawkins blind watchmaker is not the only argument against watchmaker paradigm by paley. Here are some other arguments (I'm directly cutting and pasting from the internet). False analogy The watchmaker is a false analogy because it assumes that because two objects share one common quality, they must have another quality in common.  A watch is complex A watch has a watchmaker The universe is also complex Therefore the universe has a watchmaker  The last step is wrong, because it concludes something that is not supported by the criteria. It is best clearified by another example:  Leaves are complex cellulose structures Leaves grow on trees Money bills are also complex cellulose structures Therefore money grow on trees (wich, according to the idiom, they don't)  Contradiction  The argument first assumes that a watch is different from nature, which is uncomplicated and random. It then states that since the universe is so complicated, complex, and ordered it too must have a creator. Thus, the argument gives the universe two incompatible qualities.  Shoemakers What if you went further down the beach and found a shoe. Would you assume that a watchmaker made that shoe? Of course not, you would assume a shoemaker. Therefore, according to the analogy, created life must have a lifemaker, the sun a sunmaker and snowflakes a snowmaker. This implies that there are several creators in the world, responsible for all kinds of creation.  The watchmaker's father Just like all watches have watchmakers, so do all watchmakers have fathers. Therefore, with the watchmaker anology, god has a father. Who is the father of god? and who is the father of the father? etc... This leads to an endless series, and the only way to end the series is to say that the original god just is without an origin and a cause.  Watches out of nothing? The things used by the watchmaker to make watches already exists, but the theists claim that their god created things ex nihilo, from nothing. So the analogy is false here too.   source<a href="http://www.update.uu.se/~fbendz/nogod/watchmak.htm" target="_blank">http://www.update.uu.se/~fbendz/nogod/watchmak.htm</a></blockquote>

Verification: Hath warak paha keeyada? (hatha wadikireema paha)

Top Bottom