Imagine that you are on a train in England and you see a collection of stones on a hillside that says THE BRITISH RAILWAYS WELCOMES YOU TO WALES.
In theory there would be two ways that the stones could be arranged that way. One way would be if they were deliberately arranged by an intelligent agent to convey the message that you are entering Wales. The other way would be that wind and rain randomly moved the stones so they resembled a meaningful message but in fact had no intelligent source. The likelihood of either possibility is irrelevant to the argument.
Now you could believe, based on the stones, either that you were in fact entering Wales or you could not believe that. Whichever you believe is also irrelevant to the argument. Taylor’s point is that you could not justifiably believe that the stones came to be by random arrangement and at the same time believe that they were conveying the message that you are entering Wales. That is, you are only justified in believing semantic content conveyed by matter if the arrangement of the matter is intelligently designed.News, “Yes! There is evidence for the intelligent design of the brain” at Mind Matters News (April 19, 2022)
Takehome: When we believe that our perceptions and concepts point to the truth, we implicitly acknowledge the existence of God who designed them.
PS: Overheard from the Peanuts cartoons: Trust the Science is the most anti-science statement ever. Questioning science is how you DO science!
You may also wish to read: My challenge to two atheists who deny free will Michael Egnor: There is too much of this nonsense in the science blogosphere. If Pigliucci or Coyne would like to debate free will, they can consider this a challenge from me. Free will has no physical cause? At least four categories of events in nature have no physical cause. Free will denial isn’t science, just atheism in a lab coat