Earlier today we linked to an ID blog post about the attempts to fend off Eliot Sober. https://designdisquisitions.wordpress.com/2017/04/06/critics-corner-elliott-sober/
I never allowed myself to use Bayesian reasoning, due to its seemingly dubious character, with the result I barely understand its intricacies.
Debate over design arguments//SobervBJPS3.SP.pdf
This paper challenging Eliot Sober is thus a bit beyond me, but I don’t think you can resolve the design argument in this way (and we should as well work with Sober’s paper), but I do think that a la Dembski the ID faction has made its point, save only that the conclusion ‘design’ requires a ‘designer’ has not been truly demonstrated. What the ID-ists have done is to show that design is real factor in biology, and a ‘design inference’ is most probably indicated in many biological and evolutionary contexts (not the same thing). The problem is that the term ‘designer’ has no simple definition. ‘God’ doesn’t work. The issue begs the question as to whether the ‘designer’ isn’t some kind of ‘teleological process’ (which provokes the ‘designer’ question all over again). The important point here is the Pyrrhic victory of the monotheistic designists: the design argument in the Old Testament is clearly false, and it is very dubious to claim that ‘god’ acted in history or ancient Israel. So what sort of designer could we invoke? Actually, Schopenhauer may have stumbled on the answer, although his metaphysics of the Will is not completely indicated in the Kantian context of critical metaphysics: the factor of ‘will’ is a clear possibility for an evolutionary (and/or involutionary, a term from the same batch of fallacies) ‘design x’ with an -er at the end. In a Kantian context the whole issue resolves backward and then stops: the issue of ‘god’ or the source beginning provokes an antinomy and that implies ‘transcendental idealism’ (please don’t get confused over this usage of of the Kantian ‘transcendental’.
We will leave it there and refer the reader to our Enigma of the Axial Age which reviews this question. Our intent here is a set up piece for the next post on the eonic effect, a spectacular case of ‘design’ in history.