On 13 February 2015 at 16:40, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote: > On 2/12/2015 8:28 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > Yes it does assume an unexplainable first intelligence. However, the > unexplainable is simply because of our lack of knowledge of that. The > absence of an intelligent designer is more illogical. It's just filling the > gap with nothing. > > > Hmm.... > > What if we fill the gap with elementary arithmetic? > > > What if we leave the gap with "We don't know" until we have more knowledge. >
That's what Bruno is doing, as far as I can tell. His proposed explanation is only speculative - but you can't fill the gap at all unless you're prepared to speculate. Or are you advocating abandoning the formation of hypotheses? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
