An intelligent design, requires an intelligent designer, it should be obvious...?

[Larniavc]

That is runs like a program, and follows a program...

How 'like' a program are we talking about? What is your working definition of a program and what is your justification for suggesting that this is relevant?

 

[Radrook]

Life exists. I'm not sure what concept of design leads someone to think "life" is designed though. It doesn't appear designed at all in my opinion.



No evidence.



You're talking about degrees of proof...when I haven't seen any proof at all of design. Seems like you've jumped the gun from evidence straight to conclusion.

Start with the evidence.

Does a crude water pump appear designed to you in your opinion?

 

[Larniavc]

No, he is intimately involved in it, guiding and directing it,

Can you point to a specific example of this guidance in action?

 

[Larniavc]

Does a crude water pump appear designed to you in your opinion?

Is it man made?

 

[Radrook]

Is it man made?

That's irrelevant to the criteria. "That caint be designed cuz aliens made it and day used organic materials!"

 

[Larniavc]

That's irrelevant to the criteria. "That caint be designed cuz aliens made it and day used organic materials!"

Without that information I cannot confirm that a hypothetical crude pump in designed or not.

And that is the crux of the issue: cdesign proponentists don't give the criteria to decide what is designed or not beyond 'it is like something that is designed'.

 

[Radrook]

Without that information I cannot confirm that a hypothetical crude pump in designed or not.

And that is the crux of the issue: cdesign proponentists don't give the criteria to decide what is designed or not beyond 'it is like something that is designed'.

But you hypothetically disqualified it as designed if the material were organic. Suppose aliens are using organic material to design? That would put you on the spot wouldn't it?

 

[TBDude65]

It should be obvious that Life or this reality was engineered and has an engineer behind it...

Why do you think it is "obvious" that "life or this reality" have been engineered and why do you attribute that to a conscious/sentient process?

For instance, why do you think your eye is effectively engineered backwards with the optic nerve running through your line of vision because the photo-sensitive cells point backwards? (a trait not shared with the molluscs for instance; their photosensitive cells point forwards and the optic nerve does not interfere with their line of vision like it does in humans, creating a blind spot in the middle of your field of vision)

Another example would be the nerve that operates your voice box. That nerve need only run from your brain to your voice box, but instead it goes from your brain, down your neck, past the voice-box, into your chest, back up the neck, and then finally to your voice-box. Why would it be engineered in such a way by a conscious and intelligent being? (it does the exact same thing in all mammals, like the giraffe for an example)

 

[Larniavc]

But you hypothetically disqualified it as designed if the material were organic. Suppose aliens are using organic material to design? That would put you on the spot wouldn't it?

No I didn't. I asked if it was man made.

I don't know why you can't tell me.

 

[durangodawood]

....and discovering whole cities, complete with machines and machinery, buildings, houses, roads, but no inhabitants.....

Yes.
Finding things just like we make is evidence of someone just like us.

 

[Speedwell]

That's irrelevant to the criteria. "That caint be designed cuz aliens made it and day used organic materials!"

Irrelevant to your criteria.

 

[Speedwell]

But you hypothetically disqualified it as designed if the material were organic. Suppose aliens are using organic material to design? That would put you on the spot wouldn't it?

Now you're beginning to get it. It is not always possible to detect design, even in a man-made object.

 

[TBDude65]

Now you're beginning to get it. It is not always possible to detect design, even in a man-made object.

Then how is anything "detected" as design if it is not an obvious thing? What are the criteria for "detecting design" then?

 

[Speedwell]

Then how is anything "detected" as design if it is not an obvious thing? What are the criteria for "detecting design" then?

The object is designed if it is produced by an intelligent agent for a purpose in mind. You can't always expect to determine it just by a glance. Just ask any paleontologist trying to find primitive stone tools in a rock pile. Most people will look to see if the object appears to be man made as part of their decision process--tool marks and other signs of human manufacturing techniques.

 

[TBDude65]

The object is designed if it is produced by an intelligent agent for a purpose in mind. You can't always expect to determine it just by a glance. Just ask any paleontologist trying to find primitive stone tools in a rock pile. Most people will look to see if the object appears to be man made as part of their decision process--tool marks and other signs of human manufacturing techniques.

I am a paleontologist, so I have a good understanding of how we distinguish stone working by humans from erosion. But this is based on a stringent set of criteria based on verifiable evidence linking tools to humans.

I also know what is implied by "intelligent design." What I am asking is how does one determine that things (life, the universe) must be "intelligently designed" if even you admit that design can't be detected in some instance of human-made objects? What are the criteria used to distinguish "designed" things in the universe not made by humans or other lifeforms (other animals), from the "undesigned?" Because the way you are framing it, implies that you know of specific cases of each and how they differ in order to positively assign "design" to life and/or the universe.

 

[Chriliman]

Why do you think it is "obvious" that "life or this reality" have been engineered and why do you attribute that to a conscious/sentient process?

For instance, why do you think your eye is effectively engineered backwards with the optic nerve running through your line of vision because the photo-sensitive cells point backwards? (a trait not shared with the molluscs for instance; their photosensitive cells point forwards and the optic nerve does not interfere with their line of vision like it does in humans, creating a blind spot in the middle of your field of vision)

Another example would be the nerve that operates your voice box. That nerve need only run from your brain to your voice box, but instead it goes from your brain, down your neck, past the voice-box, into your chest, back up the neck, and then finally to your voice-box. Why would it be engineered in such a way by a conscious and intelligent being? (it does the exact same thing in all mammals, like the giraffe for an example)

Good points, but none of this gives reason to conclude no designer, but rather gives reasons to wonder why the designer did things in this way. Why do our bodies decay and die if they were designed by a superior intelligence? Maybe these current bodies we find ourselves in are not the end goal, but rather a means to an important revelation that can only be conveyed in this way, which can then lead to a glorified form in the future, a form that's more conducive with what we'd expect or imagine God to be capable of making.

Of course all my thoughts are presented in light of Scripture and the teachings of Jesus Christ.

 

[TBDude65]

Good points, but none of this gives reason to conclude no designer, but rather gives reasons to wonder why the designer did things in this way. Why do our bodies decay and die if they were designed by a superior intelligence? Maybe these current bodies we find ourselves in are not the end goal, but rather a means to an important revelation that can only be conveyed in this way, which can then lead to a glorified form in the future, a form that's more conducive with what we'd expect or imagine God to be capable of making.

Of course all my thoughts are presented in light of Scripture and the teachings of Jesus Christ.

I don't think you've actually addressed any of my points. You are speculating about the intent of your proposed designer, but I want to know how you even know anything is designed. Speculating about your designer before you show a connection between the "designed" world and the "designer" is rather frivolous, no?

It would be akin to speculating about the killer's motives and attributes in a murder investigation before you ever even confirmed a murder had occurred.

 

[Speedwell]

I

I am a paleontologist, so I have a good understanding of how we distinguish stone working by humans from erosion. But this is based on a stringent set of criteria based on verifiable evidence linking tools to humans.

I also know what is implied by "intelligent design." What I am asking is how does one determine that things (life, the universe) must be "intelligently designed" if even you admit that design can't be detected in some instance of human-made objects? What are the criteria used to distinguish "designed" things in the universe not made by humans or other lifeforms (other animals), from the "undesigned?" Because the way you are framing it, implies that you know of specific cases of each and how they differ in order to positively assign "design" to life and/or the universe.

I'm trying to tell you--I don't know. Absent traces of human manufacturing techniques I don't know how you would tell. Metaphysically, design is Telos, purpose, which does not reside in the object and is not directly detectable there.

 

[TBDude65]

I

I'm trying to tell you--I don't know. Absent traces of human manufacturing techniques I don't know how you would tell. Metaphysically, design is Telos, purpose, which does not reside in the object and is not directly detectable there.

But you said you know that things can't be "detected" as designed meaning that you must know of ways to distinguish between undesigned and designed things. Or when you say you "know" do you mean something else? You assume?

 

[Chriliman]

I don't think you've actually addressed any of my points. You are speculating about the intent of your proposed designer, but I want to know how you even know anything is designed. Speculating about your designer before you show a connection between the "designed" world and the "designer" is rather frivolous, no?

It's simply a matter of subjective perspective. I look at things like the tiny machines in our cells and the inner mechanics of atoms and easily conclude that these processes were not randomly established for no reason, rather they were intended for a purpose and we can observe the purposes in real time. So from my point of view, there is no evidence anywhere in reality of something that isn't designed or purposed for a reason, at least as far as I know to this point, therefore according to your own definition of 'possible' - non-design is impossible in this reality because there's currently no evidence for it.

It would be akin to speculating about the killer's motives and attributes in a murder investigation before you ever even confirmed a murder had occurred.

In this case the evidence could easily suggest murder, but you're not willing consider who may have committed the murder because you think that person doesn't exist. This is a really morbid analogy by the way