Does design = designer?

look you tattooed pierced unregenerated moron, design points to designer.

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.

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.

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.

Quote from: General Disarray 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.

Only uneducated people make these statements.

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.

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on June 13, 2010, 06:39:04 PM

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.

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.

Which is what makes it lame. Why would you believe in anything that can not be proven?

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

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.

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.

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist 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.

What would you consider it then?

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: babsinva on June 14, 2010, 04:51:59 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?

Quote from: Lorddave on June 14, 2010, 03:26:23 PM

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist 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.

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.

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on June 14, 2010, 05:48:55 PM

Quote from: Lorddave on June 14, 2010, 03:26:23 PM

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist 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.

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?

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on June 14, 2010, 05:48:55 PM

Quote from: babsinva on June 14, 2010, 04:51:59 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: babsinva on June 14, 2010, 06:09:04 PM

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on June 14, 2010, 05:48:55 PM

Quote from: babsinva on June 14, 2010, 04:51:59 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.

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, -

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.