Intelligent Design

Agreed. I just wanted to distinguish the intelligence that would govern a single molecule's self-design from the intelligence that would design a skyscraper (though it could be reasoned that there is little or no difference.) If everything possesses the aspect of being, then it would be normal for parts of the universe to seem inefficient or flawed to us, since their self-design would be a matter of feeling rather than of any carefully laid-out plan.

If you think of intelligence as simply doing what one feels is best for one's self, then you can't even say that well-laid plans are more intelligently designed than poorly laid out ones, since the designer exists either way.

 

What I meant was that we aren't born with spears or knives. We have the ability to create them thanks to our opposable thumbs. But, were it not for humanities ingenuity, clothes would be a bit tricky for us.

 

The point is though, we're not creating those things in defiance of nature. The way the universe is "put together", we are able to construct them. We're clever animals, we figured out tools. Doesn't mean they're "unnatural". The line that may once have existed between nature and science has long since fllen apart.

 

I realise that, it wasn't a perfect point, but the main point of it was that, had this universe been designed perfectly for us or visa versa. We wouldn't require them to start of with.

 

I still see where we have more than enough ability to make them.

 

Is god a waffler?
No.
Therefore design is not a deity with a white beard and no brain.
But dynamic system of laws. Billions of years in the process.
And within that parrameter. there can be intelligent design and god.

For as one might say. if it was designed.. why does that bearing wear out.
While the other says.. If it was not,, who designed the bearing.
Simplification yes.
But roughly analogous.

And ultimately of no meaning. A 'we all agree' on one or the other.
Results in no change to humanity. Unless we let theocracy or technocracy
use it to dominate.

What we really have to do is GET ALL OUR EGGS OUT OF THIS BASKET.
O we will suck this planet dry.

Occam

 

er, not exactly. the question in that point wasn't "design" but the "intelligent" part of it.

nor am i claiming to be some infallable judgment of that quality of design, the rest of the universe it is dependent upon iteracting with is.

my point wasn't that design couldn't have been deliberate, but to question the infallability and the presumed need for that infallability, of the designer(s).

not in my pittiful and imperfect measure of those qualities, but again, as 'tested under real world conditions'.

=^^=
.../\...

 

Isn't that kind of your argument though?

I know my argument was that the evidence here doesn't point to a designer. We could simply be in one of a billion potential universes that happened to have the right rules to not collapse within milliseconds. The rules that seem so fine-tuned are precisely the rules that allow us to say so. Assuming a designer on the basis that something works seems a little rash when you consider that we don't know what the universe is meant to do, nor whether it is working. Entropy is happening, but no-one seems too fussed about that. I know man builds products with a built-in expiry date these days, but it's not like God's got to worry about losing his market for new universes... OR HAS HE?!

 

Whenever someone poses the suggestion: It is more likely that the earth was designed than it came about by chance.

I am led to think the following


In a universe that was designed by a creator, the only reason to think that we would be able to aknowlege their designing of it, is to assume that we can comprehend the very way that they think.

eg if some process is very precise and multifaceted, it appears designed because our own faculties of design have for thousands of years influenced the earth in that very way - by making parts of the earth more precise for some other part of the earth to interact with it in a particular way rather than another.

One of the logical steps that people forget in this discussion is that ANY world capable of leading to life's existance at some point would, at that point, appeare 'precisely set up' for the requirements of life. This is the case whether or not it really was designed, or had come about by chance. So there is no relationship between the extent to which the earth was designed and the extent to which is seems that design is the most probable options.

yet, people seem to think that this feeling they have, that the universe seems too well-arranged to be caused by chance, indicates an actual probability of intelligent design. when! we have just seen that the two concepts cannot lead off from eachother, for neither could possibly imply the other.

 

Bill

I personally believe that 'Law' was at some point designed or ordered..
and has, as a result of dynamic interaction of said laws that can result
in 'verses' that succeed due to success [] /evolve/
Resulted in this verse.
where law has resulted, @ one star in 2.2x10^22 stars...in humanity.

"if the universe was created, why does it appear to be a product
of evolution" [as themnax points out, appendix, an obsolete organ
from pre-iceage humanity]
is true
"things dont just appear, there must be creation"
is true, unless..
'things' have always existed.
which is much more likely than creation...
it requires no stack of turtles. [occams razor and just as valid as
the word, beginning. We spout beginning because we are structure
and mortal..only. There is no evidence whatsoever that causal logic applies to reality as a thing in itself, it is but a law of that thing.
Causality does not apply to that which has always been]

ANY world capable of leading to life's existance at some point would, at that point, appeare 'precisely set up' for the requirements of life.
exactly.

We deceive ourselves, Our reason brings water to the horse instead of leading the horse to water, leaving it alone.
And putting feet up with a beer.
To much thinking and not enough common sense.

Occam

 

Ah, I found that line from Voltaire I was looking for!

It is demonstrable that things cannot be otherwise than as they are for all being created to an end, all is necessarily for the best end. Observe that the nose has been formed to bear spectacles. Thus, we have spectacles. Legs are visibly designed for stockings, and we have stockings. Stones were made to be hewn and construct castles; therefore, my lord has a magnificent castle."

It goes on like that, and yeah, obviously he's kidding, but it seems pretty similar.

 

Yes stoner made a damn excellent comment..

The earth is a great place for life, cause it is ful of life
[as we know it jim....what bones? the dilithium crystals captain... damn so much to juggle. insufficient data ]

What but our prejudice says the universe is not FULL of such places.
Nothing.
And who are we to judge.
No-one
Lets stop being so self posessed and start thinking..

Or of course, you can believe the world was created in 4004 bc
It is each persons inherent right to believe exactly what they want to believe.

As long as they do not try to impose their belief on others.
people talk about freedom.. but when you disrespect anothers belief
outside of formal arguement/expected reply
you invite the sicherheitsdienst/inquisition though the door.

[My grandfather was executed cause he believed that in family upbringing. Jews are generally more educated than gentiles.And after research i find his proposition to be accurate..and im a blue eyed aryan...lol]

Occam

 

I only quickly skimmed through this 6 page thread but I gotta say I don't buy the "fine tuned" idea one bit. Maybe if you take a snapshot of one beautiful moment and TUNE out reality, I can see how someone could fall into this illusion.

Is the earth really fine tuned? Is it not wobbling and fluctuating and cycling through huge climate change ages? Is the land fixed as if it was created for man or do our continents crack and collapse leveling our cities? What happened in China just recently? Was the earth and universe designed on purpose to wipe out entire species of animals in natural cataclysmic events? Or is it just nature and intrinsic laws of energy.

Snapshots can look rather "fine tuned", eternal and deliberate. Look at this universe as a movie playing 10 thousand years a second and you see a very violent and unstable universe that constantly creates and destroys indiscriminately. Life is fragile and finite. information is finite. Eternal consciousness is absolutely nowhere to be found. A supernatural creator is nowhere to be found. A supernatural savior is nowhere to be found. There simply is no evidence outside of the human imagination to suggest there is or ever was a conscious creator.

 

Relax

Yes snapshot is without much meaning when the only time you can take one is when the snapshot/time allows it.
And that supports my view.
Look at earth 1million frames a sec..Once multicellular life evolved..[combination of law/probabillity and process.
and law/probabillity only defines when,, not if..
life in the end would always have occured..chance/probabillity is a duration definition. no more]
Once life is on earth.. it is always unless scoured clean from surface by something like sun going red giant.
A snapshot of earth after a 50 gigaton asteroid impact might suggest earth is not designed for life. Unless you believe in evolution,,,
[oh the irony]
The great aphorism that is a human meme now.. life will find a way [micheal crichton]
it seems life has been 'nearly' scoured from earth quite a few times, 2 or 3.
But here we are talking about it.

And true.. nothing is fine tuned.. thats why there is cancer
appendix and ricky lake.
Law allows structure. if structure exists as a set. then variation exists.
A wise man does not shift a soldier/pawn, he makes a strategy.
All exists by law.. to change what exists ,, change law.. not 'things'

So many think that because philosophy has centered on certain 'truths.'
and argues for centuries
those 'truths' hold water. Rubbish, 'humans are stupid' or speak from ignorance.
God?....chance?..wake up.. all IS LAW.
The truths of human thinking are shadow variables in the reality of singularities and superclusters. [ and thus ignorance is allowed.. they had not the tools]

Our universe shows no evidence of 'creation' It shows only that it exists as a facet of reality. And reality has always existed.. thats 90%
of the human argument of 'creation' in the trash in one sentance.
Because 'the direction' is embedded in the laws that result in our universe.
The entire argument of 'who made life' is garbage.
And always has been. Billions of man thought hours wasted due to
lack of intuitive imagination.

Someone had to say it.

occam

PS im an aussie.. who s that 'warmongering' blond?

 

There's a difference between what is wrong (opinion) and what's true (fact). It is not true to say the universe was created by an ID because there is no factual, conclusive, beyond reasonable doubt evidence, there's plenty of doubt. You can't dispute the truth and the truth is that the universe has evolved over hundreds of millions of years. You should ignore ID for many reasons, but my favourite is the paper knife theory. First the artisan has a picture in his mind of what he wants to create, to fulfil a purpose and or essence. The essence of the paper knife is to cut paper. If there was an ID then humans would have an essence, we would share a common purpose, and we wouldn't be able to change that because we'd of been created that way, bound that way. There is not one purpose but many purposes for many humans because we create our own essence by the choices we make based on what we value and desire. Our existence therefore preceeds our essence, we are self-determined. I think you should accept this abandonment of an ID and embrace existence on your own.

According to the Christian religion, God is infinite. Question: "What does it mean that God is infinite?"

Answer: The infinite nature of God simply means that God exists outside of and is not limited by time or space. Infinite simply means “without limits.” When we refer to God as "infinite," we generally refer to Him with terms like omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence. http://www.gotquestions.org/infinite-God.html

The point was an ID is harder to explain then the universe because the universe has evolved over hundreds of millions of years, starting from small matter, while the existence of God is explained by his infinity or by what else? A super God? Super dooper God? Infinite regress etc. There's a lot more evidence in one of the two theories and i know where i stand, until i fall.

 

Reefer

The point was an ID is harder to explain then the universe because the universe has evolved over hundreds of millions of years, starting from small matter, while the existence of God is explained by his infinity or by what else? A super God? Super dooper God? Infinite regress etc. There's a lot more evidence in one of the two theories and i know where i stand, until i fall.

Hundreds of billions, trillions
the observed universe is ~15 billion cycles old.. but what was there before it... ?
More unverses.
The notion that this is the one and only universe is
held by people who forgot to turn on brain in morning.
No?
SHOW proof this is the only universe.. ah cannot. Noone can,
what they believe is what they want to believe.
The answer is as simple as this..
what existed before your house.. other houses.
What existed before you.. other people.
why introduce omnipotence into a question when it is not required.
occams razor always cuts true

1. there was NO creation.
all that reality is has always been
2. Our universe is a handfull of plasticine from reality
eventually it will get packed back into the big lump.
3. the concept of omnipotent god is something from a kiddies book.
A joke, and a bad one...good grief, aliens ,come and take me
away from this asylum.

Occam

 

But isn't that just a way of avoiding the possibility that God is finite, and in the process avoiding the "russian dolls" problem - that if God is not infinite he must've had a creator or been created.

 

Nothing can come from nothing.

 

Exactly, i don't believe God is infinite because i don't believe in God, ofcourse it's a cop out, however some questions have no answer that will satisfy everyone. Occums Razor is useful in making theories succint but it's not the answer to everything. Fair enough, however old the universe is, i'm not disputing there are other universes, but that doesn't necessarily mean they or I were created by an ID. I'll believe it when i see it and therefore experiance it. Imagine if the Christian God came down and said Yo what's up, blah blah holy this etc. Would everyone then become a Christian? I'm still sceptical, it will never happen though so i can only postulate and laugh about it.

 

That's why there's no such thing as nothing. Even space is something, it is at least a medium for energy. The appearance of nothing to our perspective would actually be a great singularity consisting of everything. Not that we could ever witness singularity, because it wouldn't be singularity if we weren't dissolved in it. What there is no evidence of is an eternal consciousness.

Because consciousnesses takes billions of years to evolve, The pinnacle of consciousness around the universe would be the farthest distance from singularity, Assuming the universe cycles in and out of singularity, which it most likely does at lest to some degree, unless you can prove there is a God! In that case there never was a singularity and there never was what they call a "Big Bang", which I believe is a terribly inaccurate and misleading name. Instead of an explosion of super dense matter I believe it is simply an influx of energy that created matter.