Does design = designer?

  • 47 Replies
  • 5651 Views
*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9548
Does design = designer?
« on: June 13, 2010, 06:39:04 PM »
look you tattooed pierced unregenerated moron, design points to designer.

This brings the question, does the appearance of design mean that there is a designer?

I say, sometimes, but not necessarily. I think evolution and natural selection are perfect examples of how the universe figures itself out by it's own without needing a external being to control.
« Last Edit: June 13, 2010, 08:09:22 PM by EnglshGentleman »

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Does design = designer?
« Reply #1 on: June 13, 2010, 08:08:17 PM »
The appearance of design doesn't necessarily mean there's a designer, if that's what you're asking.
But if we know something has been designed, then of course it means there must be a designer.
So to the question, "Does design mean that there is a designer", I'd have to say yes.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9548
Re: Does design = designer?
« Reply #2 on: June 13, 2010, 08:09:43 PM »
The appearance of design doesn't necessarily mean there's a designer, if that's what you're asking.
But if we know something has been designed, then of course it means there must be a designer.
So to the question, "Does design mean that there is a designer", I'd have to say yes.

I reiterated it to fix what you asked.

?

General Disarray

  • Official Member
  • 5039
  • Magic specialist
Re: Does design = designer?
« Reply #3 on: June 13, 2010, 09:53:35 PM »
In the case of evolution, some people believe that the process couldn't have led up to us in our current form without some sort of guidance. For example, the eye. It is very complex, and its components are useless on their own, and only useful with all parts fully functioning. Some say it is impossible for the eye to evolve because it couldn't have just sprung into the genome fully formed, and its individual components would not have provided any benefit to their owners.
You don't want to make an enemy of me. I'm very powerful.

*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9548
Re: Does design = designer?
« Reply #4 on: June 13, 2010, 10:07:22 PM »
In the case of evolution, some people believe that the process couldn't have led up to us in our current form without some sort of guidance. For example, the eye. It is very complex, and its components are useless on their own, and only useful with all parts fully functioning. Some say it is impossible for the eye to evolve because it couldn't have just sprung into the genome fully formed, and its individual components would not have provided any benefit to their owners.

All one has to do is google "evolution of the eye" to find this stuff out.

The wiki has it more in depth.

*

Pongo

  • Planar Moderator
  • 6758
Re: Does design = designer?
« Reply #5 on: June 14, 2010, 01:56:07 AM »
In the case of evolution, some people believe that the process couldn't have led up to us in our current form without some sort of guidance. For example, the eye. It is very complex, and its components are useless on their own, and only useful with all parts fully functioning. Some say it is impossible for the eye to evolve because it couldn't have just sprung into the genome fully formed, and its individual components would not have provided any benefit to their owners.

Only uneducated people make these statements.

*

Ichimaru Gin :]

  • Undefeated FEer
  • Planar Moderator
  • 8904
  • Semper vigilans
Re: Does design = designer?
« Reply #6 on: June 14, 2010, 05:38:00 AM »
Look at the eyes of an octopus and compare them to the eyes of a human.
I saw a slight haze in the hotel bathroom this morning after I took a shower, have I discovered a new planet?

*

Tea.

  • 296
Re: Does design = designer?
« Reply #7 on: June 14, 2010, 06:05:01 AM »
Design points to a Designer, but there's no evidence of Design of the Universe.

A typical thing for stupid people to say is that life must either be down to Design or Chance/accident. Neither: it's down to non-random natural selection. Ugh.

That original quote was aimed at me, so I'd just like to say I have no tattoos or piercings and I'm not much of a moron, either. ;D
I don't believe in Homeopathy, Hydroplates, Faith-healing, Acupuncture, Astrology,  ghosts, witchcraft, Intelligent Design, Cellular Cosmogony, Geocentrism, Phrenology, Sťances, Dianetics or God.

I'm on this forum because friends say I'm narrow-minded.

?

General Disarray

  • Official Member
  • 5039
  • Magic specialist
Re: Does design = designer?
« Reply #8 on: June 14, 2010, 07:00:26 AM »
In the case of evolution, some people believe that the process couldn't have led up to us in our current form without some sort of guidance. For example, the eye. It is very complex, and its components are useless on their own, and only useful with all parts fully functioning. Some say it is impossible for the eye to evolve because it couldn't have just sprung into the genome fully formed, and its individual components would not have provided any benefit to their owners.

Only uneducated people make these statements.

I never said I believed this.
You don't want to make an enemy of me. I'm very powerful.

?

Muphci

  • 4458
Re: Does design = designer?
« Reply #9 on: June 14, 2010, 09:49:44 AM »
I think evolution and natural selection are perfect examples of how the universe figures itself out by it's own without needing a external being to control.

That's pretty much exactly what Pantheism is.
There is no such thing as no time for fisting.

*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9548
Re: Does design = designer?
« Reply #10 on: June 14, 2010, 09:58:03 AM »
I think evolution and natural selection are perfect examples of how the universe figures itself out by it's own without needing a external being to control.

That's pretty much exactly what Pantheism is.

Maybe my wording could have shown that, but that's not what I meant at all. Pantheists worship the universe and nature as if it were a God. In their eyes God = Universe. I believe Universe = Universe.

?

General Disarray

  • Official Member
  • 5039
  • Magic specialist
Re: Does design = designer?
« Reply #11 on: June 14, 2010, 10:01:51 AM »
A good creator would arrange things so that you couldn't tell it had done anything at all.

Pretty much the biggest aspect of religion is faith, believing in something that you cannot factually verify.

So no, creation does not imply a creator, but it doesn't have to for religious people.
You don't want to make an enemy of me. I'm very powerful.

*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9548
Re: Does design = designer?
« Reply #12 on: June 14, 2010, 10:05:53 AM »
A good creator would arrange things so that you couldn't tell it had done anything at all.


What gives you that idea? Almost any manufacturer you can think of today makes sure that its logo or name is visible on their product. I don't see how good creator = you don't know who created it. That is just silliness. That means bad creator because anybody can take credit for it.

*

Lorddave

  • 18198
Re: Does design = designer?
« Reply #13 on: June 14, 2010, 10:17:33 AM »
I have to say yes.
However, it is folly to assume that something designed had to have a sentient designer.

To me, life is designed to exist best in it's environment.  What designed it?  Natural selection with random mutations.  While the materials may have been random, the goal was very clear: To survive.
You have been ignored for common interest of mankind.

I am a terrible person and I am a typical Blowhard Liberal for being wrong about Bom.

?

General Disarray

  • Official Member
  • 5039
  • Magic specialist
Re: Does design = designer?
« Reply #14 on: June 14, 2010, 10:28:37 AM »
Pretty much the biggest aspect of religion is faith, believing in something that you cannot factually verify.
You don't want to make an enemy of me. I'm very powerful.

?

Muphci

  • 4458
Re: Does design = designer?
« Reply #15 on: June 14, 2010, 10:31:16 AM »
Which is what makes it lame. Why would you believe in anything that can not be proven?
There is no such thing as no time for fisting.

*

theonlydann

  • Official Member
  • 24186
Re: Does design = designer?
« Reply #16 on: June 14, 2010, 10:49:53 AM »
Which is what makes it lame. Why would you believe in anything that can not be proven?
Faith.

its a fun circle.

?

Crustinator

  • 7813
  • Bamhammer horror!
Re: Does design = designer?
« Reply #17 on: June 14, 2010, 12:56:21 PM »
This brings the question, does the appearance of design mean that there is a designer?

All designs have a creator of some sort, just not necessarily a creator with a cloud and white beard.

Where God substitute Evolution.

?

General Disarray

  • Official Member
  • 5039
  • Magic specialist
Re: Does design = designer?
« Reply #18 on: June 14, 2010, 12:57:53 PM »
True, you could always think of the mechanism by which it happens as the 'designer'.
You don't want to make an enemy of me. I'm very powerful.

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Does design = designer?
« Reply #19 on: June 14, 2010, 02:44:36 PM »
Just the idea that something was "designed" implies something intelligent having designed it.  If evolution is truly fully mechanical, with no intelligent creator behind it, then it cannot be referred to as designed.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

Lorddave

  • 18198
Re: Does design = designer?
« Reply #20 on: June 14, 2010, 03:26:23 PM »
Just the idea that something was "designed" implies something intelligent having designed it.  If evolution is truly fully mechanical, with no intelligent creator behind it, then it cannot be referred to as designed.

What would you consider it then?
You have been ignored for common interest of mankind.

I am a terrible person and I am a typical Blowhard Liberal for being wrong about Bom.

Re: Does design = designer?
« Reply #21 on: June 14, 2010, 03:28:11 PM »
Are atoms designed?

*

babsinva

  • 2222
  • aka Mr. Fahrenheit
Re: Does design = designer?
« Reply #22 on: June 14, 2010, 04:51:59 PM »
The appearance of design doesn't necessarily mean there's a designer, if that's what you're asking.
But if we know something has been designed, then of course it means there must be a designer.
So to the question, "Does design mean that there is a designer", I'd have to say yes.
Just the idea that something was "designed" implies something intelligent having designed it.  If evolution is truly fully mechanical, with no intelligent creator behind it, then it cannot be referred to as designed.

I hear what you are saying, and understand your point about "appearance", but if you will consider this for a moment.   Everyone has heard of sculptor and painter Michelangelo, and although you may not have seen any of his original works, or met him personally, or even seen him alive, or physically with your own eyes see him in action, - would you then still deny his existence?  Does it diminish his work not knowing those other things?  Do you need to have met him to believe he was the designer of his works?  Do you think his works came into existence without him?  Do you think it's an "appearance" of design and not really a design?

Quote from Big Giant Head:  "Considered fictitious or phantom does not quantify its non-existence."

Quote from Soze:  "We cannot escape perception, but we can't assume reality doesn't exist outside of perception."

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Does design = designer?
« Reply #23 on: June 14, 2010, 05:48:55 PM »
Just the idea that something was "designed" implies something intelligent having designed it.  If evolution is truly fully mechanical, with no intelligent creator behind it, then it cannot be referred to as designed.

What would you consider it then?

I'm probably a poor person to ask that question as I believe there was an intelligent creator behind it.

Anyway, for those having trouble grasping my point, here's the definition of the word "design" by the Free Online Dictionary:

de?sign  (d-zn)
v. de?signed, de?sign?ing, de?signs
v.tr.
1.
a. To conceive or fashion in the mind; invent: design a good excuse for not attending the conference.
b. To formulate a plan for; devise: designed a marketing strategy for the new product.
2. To plan out in systematic, usually graphic form: design a building; design a computer program.
3. To create or contrive for a particular purpose or effect: a game designed to appeal to all ages.
4. To have as a goal or purpose; intend.
5. To create or execute in an artistic or highly skilled manner.
v.intr.
1. To make or execute plans.
2. To have a goal or purpose in mind.
3. To create designs.

Note how every instance includes built into the definition the notion of a subject with some kind of intent.  Reflect on the fact that intent can't exist without intelligence.

I hear what you are saying, and understand your point about "appearance", but if you will consider this for a moment.   Everyone has heard of sculptor and painter Michelangelo, and although you may not have seen any of his original works, or met him personally, or even seen him alive, or physically with your own eyes see him in action, - would you then still deny his existence?  Does it diminish his work not knowing those other things?  Do you need to have met him to believe he was the designer of his works?  Do you think his works came into existence without him?  Do you think it's an "appearance" of design and not really a design?

No.  What's your point, exactly?
« Last Edit: June 14, 2010, 05:54:35 PM by Roundy the Truthinessist »
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

babsinva

  • 2222
  • aka Mr. Fahrenheit
Re: Does design = designer?
« Reply #24 on: June 14, 2010, 06:09:04 PM »

I hear what you are saying, and understand your point about "appearance", but if you will consider this for a moment.   Everyone has heard of sculptor and painter Michelangelo, and although you may not have seen any of his original works, or met him personally, or even seen him alive, or physically with your own eyes see him in action, - would you then still deny his existence?  Does it diminish his work not knowing those other things?  Do you need to have met him to believe he was the designer of his works?  Do you think his works came into existence without him?  Do you think it's an "appearance" of design and not really a design?

No.  What's your point, exactly?

Your answer.   
That is the point.

Quote from Big Giant Head:  "Considered fictitious or phantom does not quantify its non-existence."

Quote from Soze:  "We cannot escape perception, but we can't assume reality doesn't exist outside of perception."

*

Lorddave

  • 18198
Re: Does design = designer?
« Reply #25 on: June 14, 2010, 06:21:34 PM »
Just the idea that something was "designed" implies something intelligent having designed it.  If evolution is truly fully mechanical, with no intelligent creator behind it, then it cannot be referred to as designed.

What would you consider it then?

I'm probably a poor person to ask that question as I believe there was an intelligent creator behind it.

Anyway, for those having trouble grasping my point, here's the definition of the word "design" by the Free Online Dictionary:

de?sign  (d-zn)
v. de?signed, de?sign?ing, de?signs
v.tr.
1.
a. To conceive or fashion in the mind; invent: design a good excuse for not attending the conference.
b. To formulate a plan for; devise: designed a marketing strategy for the new product.
2. To plan out in systematic, usually graphic form: design a building; design a computer program.
3. To create or contrive for a particular purpose or effect: a game designed to appeal to all ages.
4. To have as a goal or purpose; intend.
5. To create or execute in an artistic or highly skilled manner.
v.intr.
1. To make or execute plans.
2. To have a goal or purpose in mind.
3. To create designs.

Note how every instance includes built into the definition the notion of a subject with some kind of intent.  Reflect on the fact that intent can't exist without intelligence.


What about the shape of sugar?  Or sand?  Those are shapes based on the chemical composition of the substance as well as how it was made. (let's assume without any intelligent intervention)  What would you call that?
You have been ignored for common interest of mankind.

I am a terrible person and I am a typical Blowhard Liberal for being wrong about Bom.

*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9548
Re: Does design = designer?
« Reply #26 on: June 14, 2010, 06:28:46 PM »
Just the idea that something was "designed" implies something intelligent having designed it.  If evolution is truly fully mechanical, with no intelligent creator behind it, then it cannot be referred to as designed.

What would you consider it then?

I'm probably a poor person to ask that question as I believe there was an intelligent creator behind it.

Anyway, for those having trouble grasping my point, here's the definition of the word "design" by the Free Online Dictionary:

de?sign  (d-zn)
v. de?signed, de?sign?ing, de?signs
v.tr.
1.
a. To conceive or fashion in the mind; invent: design a good excuse for not attending the conference.
b. To formulate a plan for; devise: designed a marketing strategy for the new product.
2. To plan out in systematic, usually graphic form: design a building; design a computer program.
3. To create or contrive for a particular purpose or effect: a game designed to appeal to all ages.
4. To have as a goal or purpose; intend.
5. To create or execute in an artistic or highly skilled manner.
v.intr.
1. To make or execute plans.
2. To have a goal or purpose in mind.
3. To create designs.

Note how every instance includes built into the definition the notion of a subject with some kind of intent.  Reflect on the fact that intent can't exist without intelligence.


What about the shape of sugar?  Or sand?  Those are shapes based on the chemical composition of the substance as well as how it was made. (let's assume without any intelligent intervention)  What would you call that?

It all depends if there was intent. Some sand you can get for pool filters is segregated on each little piece of sand. That is because it was designed to be that way. Sand you find on the beach is not designed because nobody meant it to be that way.

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Does design = designer?
« Reply #27 on: June 14, 2010, 06:48:03 PM »

I hear what you are saying, and understand your point about "appearance", but if you will consider this for a moment.   Everyone has heard of sculptor and painter Michelangelo, and although you may not have seen any of his original works, or met him personally, or even seen him alive, or physically with your own eyes see him in action, - would you then still deny his existence?  Does it diminish his work not knowing those other things?  Do you need to have met him to believe he was the designer of his works?  Do you think his works came into existence without him?  Do you think it's an "appearance" of design and not really a design?

No.  What's your point, exactly?

Your answer.   
That is the point.



Explain.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

babsinva

  • 2222
  • aka Mr. Fahrenheit
Re: Does design = designer?
« Reply #28 on: June 14, 2010, 10:17:10 PM »

I hear what you are saying, and understand your point about "appearance", but if you will consider this for a moment.   Everyone has heard of sculptor and painter Michelangelo, and although you may not have seen any of his original works, or met him personally, or even seen him alive, or physically with your own eyes see him in action, - would you then still deny his existence?  Does it diminish his work not knowing those other things?  Do you need to have met him to believe he was the designer of his works?  Do you think his works came into existence without him?  Do you think it's an "appearance" of design and not really a design?

No.  What's your point, exactly?

Your answer.   
That is the point.



Explain.

I asked you this as it pertains to Michelangelo (partially re-quoted from above) ... >>
Quote
and although you may not have seen any of his original works, or met him personally, or even seen him alive, or physically with your own eyes see him in action, -
Then I finished with a series of 4 or 5 questions of which you answered NO.  Now apply that scenario, the questions, and your answers to the topic heading.

Quote from Big Giant Head:  "Considered fictitious or phantom does not quantify its non-existence."

Quote from Soze:  "We cannot escape perception, but we can't assume reality doesn't exist outside of perception."

?

Crustinator

  • 7813
  • Bamhammer horror!
Re: Does design = designer?
« Reply #29 on: June 15, 2010, 04:09:44 AM »
Just the idea that something was "designed" implies something intelligent having designed it.  If evolution is truly fully mechanical, with no intelligent creator behind it, then it cannot be referred to as designed.

Yes. But something can appear "designed" without actually being designed in an intelligent product meaning.

There are also multiple definitions of "design", which confuses the issue.