Inherent Function or Intelligent Design?

I recently had a discussion with a friend of mine regarding a "higher power." He told me that he believed in a creator because he saw design in everything, that the function of everything to him meant that it was designed.

He went on to say that he doesn't believe in religion, he's mostly atheistic about gods, he doesn't attribute any known specifics, but he sees that everything "working" indicates to him an intelligence behind it.

My personal take is that I don't say it's impossible, but we unfailingly see that there is always a naturalistic explanation for everything, I see no reason to assume an intelligence is/was at work.

My reply was that we can't draw any conclusions about there being an intelligence behind it because all we know through science is that things do function of their own volition, so why would he feel the need to assume an intelligence beyond it? He again stated that, to him, the evidence was in the function.

So, we agreed to disagree, as the point for each of us was clear and we had nothing else to contribute for our arguments. I obviously don't believe there's a god who designed/created everything, however I can put myself in that mindset of someone who would make the leap that the function indicates intelligence.

What do you guys think? Do you think that the function of everything (physics) can be indicative of an "intelligence?"

 

What exactly does that mean? God is god. Religion is made by man.

Why not. You can see an indication of something in anything if you want.

They usually call that religion or belief then.

 

The first law of the universe should be that there is no such thing as nothing. It might seem more logical that there really shouldn't be anything at all. Regardless of how we feel, we know for a fact that stuff exists and that space itself is a substance that bends and warps. Is this law intrinsic or is it conscious will? Well, "conscious will" simply doesn't make any sense. How can there actually have been a state of nothing AND consciousness? Where did consciousness come from? That's a logic loop that fails to explain anything. So then the logical, most probable conclusion is that there simply is no such thing as actual nothing, and never was. The universe most likely cycles, phases have beginnings and ends but the whole cycle is eternal. Will the acknowledgement that "it just is" be enough? When all logic and evidence point away from God? When every advance in scientific knowledge makes God less likely? When all Testaments of God are exposed as lies?

 

This is what I've said as well, "The evidence actually suggests that there is no such thing as 'nothing.'" If we recognize consciousness as a product of materials working together, then consciousness "before something" (without materials) isn't possible. Then I come back to, so why assume that there was nothing? Why not assume that something always was that is not supernatural?

Agreed, I can see no reason to make the leap to a supernatural creator, especially when history continuously shows natural explanations for even the most chronologically-relative strange phenomenon.

 

That we are intelligent means we can make intelligent designs and somewhere in that design is intelligence. Hot to cold is magnanimous intent.

 

I can see the logic behind thetheory. If we see a complex, precision watch on the ground we know that it was designed by a being with knowledge of precision craftsmanship. Bt a biological creature, with all its muscular, digestive, nervous, and other complex systems, we assume it to just be natural?

But really, its a load of crap. Over the entire existence of the universe, some complex things were bound to line up simply by coincidence. If it wasnt biology and life and ecosystems and fusion powered stars, itd be something else that we'd never know about.

 

The design of a game of Monopoly is based on the roll of dice

The 'design' of a ultimate intelligence may well just be based on the roll of the dice.

So the construct of intelligent design is based on the meaning of the word 'design'

Also understanding everything at one point in time means calculating at infinity in a universe thats arguably expanding and tending toward a greater level of complexity. Something an original creator may not be able to do. So also based on the meaning of 'intelligent'

So Intelligent and Design, two words put together that can basically mean anything

 

That's the intelligence of it. Intelligence is a design and designs are intelligent.
Everything is in-formation, informing.

 

Patterns emerge from chaos and patterns repeat. In a different universe trillions of light years away, it's a fair bet that space is still space and prime numbers are still prime numbers. Galaxies are not much different from each other. In our observable universe with billions of them, there are a few types, spirals and ellipticals... they all contain spinning stars with planets and have dense centers with black holes in the middle.

I was expecting a theist to argue "if space "just is", then why not God "just is"? Space would be the simplest form possible in our universe while the idea of God is actually impossibly complex. Which form is most likely to exist at the beginnings of a new universe?

Patterns predate design, intelligence is reason. We can reason that natural patterns emerge from simple intrinsic forms, not designed forms. Complexity of patterns can grow over time. I can not however, find any reason how a complex mind can PREDATE, CREATE, and DESIGN simpler forms. Think about it, complex forms can not predate simple forms! Einstein showed us that matter is made of basically three things; space, time and energy. Intrinsic, automatic, thoughtless patterns. Just as time and energy have formed matter, time and matter formed higher and higher forms of complexity that could easily be confused with conscious designs at the points of extreme complexity.

 

Because if something is assumed, the next question for me, would be "when did that assumed something come into existence?" Which would lead to, "if the assumed something is assumed eternal…"

I see the same problem for the atheist as for the theist. Too many faith (or whatever else you want to call it) based assumptions...

 

Chaos? Is that some kind of god? If we have patterns and repeating patterns, we do not have chaos. Where did chaos go?

Again, in all this orchestration of organization, where is chaos.

Does expectation emerge from chaos? Why does god or good need to be impossibly complex?

That patterns emerge, not from chaos in this instance, but from simple intrinsic forms, means that creation is a law without opposite. More complex does not mean higher and simpler does not mean lower.

Multiplication is quick addition. You don't need complexity but only multiplication of, "a few simple intrinsic forms."

You mean like this soliloquy could be confused with conscious design?

 

Where is most of the energy in our solar system? Look at the surface of the sun and tell me chaos no longer exists. it is everywhere from sub atomic particles to stars and galaxies, the randomness of energy and spatial fluctuations. Is God random static noise? I thought god was an omniscient being/consciousness.

By popular definition, God is impossibly complex, he's an all knowing, all powerful SUPERNATURAL being. That's a lot more complex than some spatial vibrations.

Umm, yes it does actually!

 

Perhaps he does not feel any need, he just happens to have this conviction/belief?

Yes, it can be indeed.

Right on man :2thumbsup: DUh! We're on to something But seriously, just because religion is man made there can't be a higher power?

 

When I look at the surface of the sun, I see the sun, I don't see the indiscriminate.

I thought you didn't believe in god.

Popular definition is a design. If god exists by your perspective, it wouldn't be by popular definition.

Is there somewhere lacking in information? Is there somewhere where E does not equal MC2?

Creation is a law without opposite, or more complex means higher?

 

Can you elaborate? I don't understand.

 

Ok, so if we assume that "something that always was" is not supernatural: when and how did that something come into existence?

 

thedope,
you post is nothing but word games and unworthy of any further response.

 

So in other words you have no lucid argument. Words are all we have to work with in this genre.

 

[emphasis mine]
Unless I'm still not understanding you, the answer is in the question lol.