I d the future a podcast about evolution and intelligent design

greetings I'm Tom Gilson and today's ID the future brings you Michael Biey once again

the second part of his conversation with Pat Flynn on the topic, the best objections to irreducible complexity and

intelligent design.

B. He is the author of three highly original scientific works on intelligent design, plus a fourth

volume compiling his responses to objections over the years.

And today, courtesy of Pat Flynn's Philosophy for the People Podcast will hear thoughts on whether

those best objections are even scientific objections, most of them.

Pat Flynn speaks first as they pick up the conversation here.

I think one thing that Planaga, in at least his positive analysis of your argument in addition to what you've said as well is sort of how this fits in in the greater debate.

And one thing that Planaga says,

and I think he's right about this,

is like, hey, if you're a naturalist,

it's like evolution's sort of the only game in town, right?

If the evolutionary story doesn't work, it seems like the explanatory power of a

naturalistic paradigm just like completely plummets, right? So like this sort of

has to be true for naturalism to be thought and a lot of naturalists I think would agree with that even implicitly. I mean that's why like Dawkins would say things like you know Darwin gave it, made it possible to be an intellectually satisfied atheist or stuff like that.

So we can see this is tightly, tightly bound.

So I think what other things that your argument might do is not only can they sort of preserve or even

facilitate that reasonable design belief but it also seems to me then that like to motivate naturalism in the face of your criticisms,

I mean what's left?

It seems like you would need something like a really strong problem of evil or something, right?

...