saidsimply

Introduction

Reddit comments prove intelligent design. The irony and logical force of this argument should interest any Redditor. The arguments I make in this essay will force the Reddit user to either concede the Theist’s leap to intelligent design, or quit using reddit entirely.

The argument depends on 5 core ideas, which will be demonstrated with thorough argumentation.

1. The similarity of DNA and Reddit comments.
2. That actions entail belief.
3. That we should avoid double standards.
4. The failure of the Empiricist standard.
5. That the Redditors leap, and the Theists leap are the same.

If any of these core ideas fail, then this essay will fail. This means the argument is fully falsifiable and open to critique. But fair warning, the act of refuting this essay on the internet, will inadvertently prove my point. Herein lies the power of this argument. It’s both ironic, and true.

The Reddit Experience

Reddit.com presents you with profiles, posts, groups, and text. All of which, is simply information. You do not see people posting comments, unless you’re physically present with someone using Reddit. Yet, despite that, you reply as if they’re really there.

The DNA Experience

DNA is much the same. DNA is a language, where biological communication occurs. My DNA tells my body to make blue eyes, or yours might make brown eyes. When a Theist looks at DNA, they often see infer only a mind could have created it. However, the Theist does not see the mind that made the DNA, but nonetheless acts has if that mind really did.

Double standards

When we are searching for the truth, we should avoid applying double standards. For example, if I believe my pen-pal exists because I’ve had my letters answered, but that Redditors don’t exist when they answer my comments, then I’m applying a double standard and being inconsistent. All that’s needed to establish a double-standard is knowledge that both beliefs require the same standard, (i.e., letters and internet comments) but that someone is applying different standards, (i.e., I need an answer to my letter to believe, but I wont believe when I get an answer to my comment.) This will become relevant again when we return to the Reddit-comment-proof for intelligent design.

Hume: The problem of Induction

If we say we need sensory experience to establish our beliefs, as David Hume does, then we can’t derive a personal creator from the existence of DNA. Because DNA is just language and code, looking at it doesn’t give us a vision of a divine mind. However, to remain consistent with Humes standard, we must also admit the same for Reddit comments: looking at them isn’t the same as seeing their author.

Actions entail belief

We hope to reach certain ends from our actions, and those hopes assume metaphysical beliefs, which don’t enter our sensory experience. You’re hoping your shower will work again today like it did yesterday, but you have no sensory proof that it will. Similarly, on Reddit, your hoping the comments you interact with, were written by other human beings, but you have no sensory proof, that they are. Your Reddit behavior, then, betrays your non-empirical hopes, whether you want it to or not.

What Standard does the Redditor apply?

If Hume’s standard fails to explain your behavior, what standard are you using on Reddit then? When I’m on the internet, I look for signs of personal authorship that might differentiate comments left by a bot vs. ones left by a human being. I’ve found that most reliable standard is to look for comments that appear rational, meaningful, and self-consistent, since bots often have fishy hints that don’t add up, like lack of post-history, inconsistent user photos, or hap-hazard remarks made elsewhere. This standard can’t be reduced to Humes sensory standard however, because meaning in words, and logical consistency, are non-material properties of the information.

The Argument

With our 5 core ideas established, everything is now in place. If you respond to Reddit comments like they have personal authorship, your standard for believing this is the same standard a theist uses to conclude DNA is evidence for God. Just like Reddit comments, DNA appears rational, meaningful, and self-consistent. If you doubt this Theistic standard of inference, you must also doubt your Reddit standard of inference, since both are non-empirical assumptions. Therefore, you either use Reddit and believe the Theist, or doubt Reddit and doubt the Theist. Therefore Reddit comments prove intelligent design, through reducing Reddit users to absurdity.

Criticism

But aren’t these two conclusions totally unrelated? A divine personal creator is a much bigger leap than a human author to a reddit comment. A leap that certainly requires more than rational, meaningful, and self-consistent properties in DNA. Why assume these properties always come from a mind?

How do you know a divine mind and a human mind need separate standards to be assumed? A leap to a human mind on reddit certainly requires more than rational, meaningful, and self-consistent properties in their comments. Yet you still make the leap.

The question isn’t whether there is evidence for rational, self-consistent, and meaningful objects that didn’t come from a mind, (I’d be all ears if someone could provide an example of that btw) but rather that Redditors treat these properties already as symptomatic of a mind.

To break this double standard, the Redditor must come up with explanation for how he makes these judgements on the internet. If he can’t, then the double-standard still applies.

Or admit other possibilities that may be even more uncomfortable, such as explaining DNA with the existence of alien life forms. This however just moves the question back a step, and the Theist can just ask for the origin of those rational, self-consistent, meaningful forms of alien life.

Conclusion

Questions don’t exist in a vacuum, but are connected to your life, and all it’s baggage. Your faith in Reddit reveals a deeper faith. Therefore, you can either drop faith in Redditors and get a life outside Reddit, or admit that consistency compels you to accept an intelligent Creator. Go ahead and try to refute this essay, because you’ll ironically be proving me right: that you assume this essay had a personal creator, implying in the very act of refuting it, that based on the same standard of evidence, a personal creator of DNA also exists.