WolfpackN64 said:
LuccaCardoso1 said:
"Free will" doesn't answer the problem of evil. Evil doesn't come only from what humans choose to do. Down syndrome is an evil, I think we can all agree on that, and it has nothing to do with what humans choose to do. It's a genetic error. The same works for any genetic disease.
No, the teleological argument is literally the same as intelligent design. They're synonymous.
And saying "god did it" doesn't actually answer anything.
|
Down syndrome is an evil? I think your sense of morality on the matters of genetics are a bit twisted. These are things atheists like Stephen Fry don't get. Nature in itself, and certainly in biology are morally neutral. Morality springs forth from interaction between beings, one of which must have at least primitive reasoning or social skills. There is nothing moral about Down, or kids getting cancer. It's a tragedy, but in itself it has no overlap with the field of morality.
|
Down syndrome is not an evil to nature, but it's an evil to humans. We, as humans, find that disabling someone from birth is immoral. And since you believe that our morality comes from God, God would also think that Down syndrome is an evil. Then why would he let people have down syndrome?
WolfpackN64 said:
I've written a paper on the ontological, teleological and cosmological argument and I can assure you they're not synonymous. Intelligent design implies teleology, teleology doesn't imply intelligent design.
|
Teleology is one thing, the teleological argument is another. Teleology is not necessarily tied to evolution, but the teleological argument is intelligent design.
WolfpackN64 said:
The cosmological argument eventually boils down to: the inference to the best explanation is that only God could have done it.
|
But then again, saying that God did it doesn't actually answer anything. We still don't know how he did it, what he used to do it, nothing. You're just saying that God did it because humans are afraid of not having an answer.