• dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    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.

    • HiddenLayer5@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Respectfully but strongly disagree. At its very core, math is based on logic which would be valid even without the existence of us or the universe. Things like “if a is false, and b is false, then the conditions a and b and a or b must both also be false; but if a is true and b is false, then the condition of a and b is still false but a or b is true.” Statements like that are what the simplest axioms are derived from, and everything else in math in turn. For example, from the previous statements one can derive that “if a is false and b is false, then both b and c and a and c must also be false regardless of the value of c; but if b or c is true and we know that b is false, then c must be true.” Doesn’t take a god to figure that out, it just is. Math tells you nothing about any sort of higher power or creator, nor does it prove the absence of a higher power or creator.

      Also, math is fundamentally incomplete and never will be complete.

    • fossphi@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      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?

    • dirtbiker509@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Intelligent design maybe, but at the very least the possibility of higher existence or beings.