Stamets@lemmy.world to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 10 months agoQuick quick quicklemmy.worldimagemessage-square18fedilinkarrow-up1302arrow-down110
arrow-up1292arrow-down1imageQuick quick quicklemmy.worldStamets@lemmy.world to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 10 months agomessage-square18fedilink
minus-squaredangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkarrow-up3arrow-down9·edit-210 months agoIronically, the existence of consistent mathematical laws derived from thousands of years of experimentation and observation is probably the most compelling argument for intelligent design, more so than any holy book.
minus-squarefossphi@lemm.eelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·10 months agoWhat, how? Self consistent systems do not imply design, imo. There has to be a certain level of self consistency for any entity to exist?
minus-squaredirtbiker509@lemm.eelinkfedilinkarrow-up1·10 months agoIntelligent design maybe, but at the very least the possibility of higher existence or beings.
Ironically, the existence of consistent mathematical laws derived from thousands of years of experimentation and observation is probably the most compelling argument for intelligent design, more so than any holy book.
What, how?
Self consistent systems do not imply design, imo. There has to be a certain level of self consistency for any entity to exist?
Intelligent design maybe, but at the very least the possibility of higher existence or beings.