Why designed?

[idav]

So basically I don't understand why some people see design evrywhere.

Cause we tend to see patterns in complexity which makes people think of design. It doesn't mean it is designed it just means we like to find patterns.

 

[camanintx]

So basically I don't understand why some people see design evrywhere.

On another thread, a creationist tried to argue that you can detect design by identifying a purpose for something. As your example points out, many things can be used for something other than their original purpose. When I asked how you would know what the original purpose of something is, I never got an answer.

 

[shawn001]

It sounds off topic to me too.

The question in the OP was about why some people see design in complicated things like a human or a leg or ... when I don't

I don't understand the argument that it must be designed because it it good at something.

Yesterday I was fixing up my new house and a frind of mine came by with bread.
I didn't have a knife in the house since we don't live there so I used a saw to cut it.
I used a credit card to spread pate on the bread.
I used a spatula to cut a cucumber.

Neither a saw , a spatula or a credit card was to my knowledge designed to be used in this manner, but they worked fine. They may all be designed, but in this case they seem to be good at something they were not designed for.

So just because a leg is good for walking doesn't mean it was designed for that purpose.

I don't understand the argument that something complex must be designed since I can think of complex things that are not designed.
Man of faith did say something about complexity not being enough, that things had to work to, but I still don't understand it.
My messy desk would work fine as a place for a fire to start, but it was not designed for this.

I don't understand the argument that because something is beautiful it must be designed since any random things can be beautiful.

So basically I don't understand why some people see design evrywhere.

"It sounds off topic to me too."

But its not at all. The universe evolved and so did the solar system, everything after the big bang.


These were the questions to him which he has not answered yet.


Man of Faith

Two questions for you.

Lets just say the universe was designed for the sake of discussion.

Where did the elements like Carbon come from?

How did the moon form?

"The question in the OP was about why some people see design in complicated things like a human or a leg "

ITs where the element carbon actually came from to later evolve a human or a leg.

 

[shawn001]

lunakilo

I am pointing out to the OP title "why designed?"

But creationsists take single facts like the age of the earth, instead of the age of the solar system and the formation of the solar system. Or the universe and where the elements came from in the first place that make up the solar system and the earth and that it too evolved from nucleosythesis and super novas, which created the elements and heance the solar system and heance much later us.

Obviously man of faith hasn't read things like the post here on whale evolution or even know about mammal or primate evolution or hominid evolution. Or reptile evolution or any evolution for life on earth.

But the elements are on topic to what were made from and how.

The formation of the moon is on topic, because his designer slammmed a planet the size of mars into earth and that formed the moon.

Was there a better way to design the universe by an omnipotent being, then random events and 13.7 billion years?

That these people also deny evolution is beyond comprehension, despite billions of facts that empirically support it.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Can you show me a leg in the process of being developed naturally?

Tadpoles into frogs via metamorphosis.

 

[shawn001]

Whales use to have legs and lost them.

Snakes use to have legs and lost them.

Evolution goes both ways.

 

[Etritonakin]

The program was designed -and even the end result was the product of many individual designers. The fact that the end result could use some tweaks/thinning, etc. just shows a lack of unity.

You did design your desktop -but that's not to say you did it very well

 

[Ouroboros]

Cause we tend to see patterns in complexity which makes people think of design. It doesn't mean it is designed it just means we like to find patterns.

Yup.

And the funny thing is that some art (which is designed) can look completely chaotic and disorganized.

Perhaps we perceive simpler complexity of order to be designed, while a higher complexity of order or pattern (unrecognizable for our pattern based brain), then we think of it as disordered and not designed. Ultimately, everything is ordered, just that some things are simpler in complexity than others.

--edit

Oops. I just saw that this is a very old thread! Nvm.

 

[Sapiens]

Can you show me a leg in the process of being developed naturally?

Look at the entire line of sarcopterygian fish ( Introduction to the Sarcopterygii )

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

So I am wondering why some people look at a human being and think, this big, complicated, messy bag of mostly water must have been designed to look exactly like this.

I don't think you are correct that human beings are messy. You are right to predict that the design of human beings would be messy on account of evolution theory.

There is total chaos of random mutation and recombination on the one hand, and natural selection on the other hand sorting it out. Just looking at the mathematics of it, total chaos will win out.

The organisms look like they have been chosen as a whole, in a sophisticated way, rather than many independent decisions coming together accidently. The evidence points towards intelligent design.

And only those who reject the idea that freedom is real and relevant in the universe regardless of any evidence say otherwise.

 

[Etritonakin]

Some say the human body is imperfectly designed -but it serves its function very well.

If one considers it to be designed, the design choices come into question.

Are tears simply to lubricate the eye -or designed to express sadness to another?

Why must we spend most of our lives just keeping ourselves alive?

Why are we so bound to our earthly environment when energy could be gained much more efficiently?

Why do we feel pain?

Why are our lifespans limited to about 120 years?

Why are we so resilient in some aspects, and so weak and vulnerable in others?

As we are born essentially ignorant, it seems the most important aspect of the human body is how it allows the mind and character of a person to be affected.
It is an excellent teaching tool for new creative beings. I think a more "perfect" body would not be as effective at focusing our minds on certain truths -and our present bodies limit our ability to make a mess of things while we learn.

 

[Etritonakin]

anddddd... I've brought another thread to a screeching halt

sorry

bump

 

[shawn001]

How come we are working on making the design better now ourselves?

 

[Etritonakin]

How come we are working on making the design better now ourselves?

Because now we can (made possible by this design -this perspective -this situation) -though we probably would not get much farther on our own without utterly destroying the design.
Whether you look at it from a perspective of design or evolution, the human body is a temporary state.

However, evolution doesn't have a plan to stop our self-destruction, so we ought to focus on that if we don't think God will save us (and even if we do, really) -then consider self-evolution.

 

[shawn001]

Because now we can (made possible by this design -this perspective -this situation) -though we probably would not get much farther on our own without utterly destroying the design.
Whether you look at it from a perspective of design or evolution, the human body is a temporary state.

However, evolution doesn't have a plan to stop our self-destruction, so we ought to focus on that if we don't think God will save us (and even if we do, really) -then consider self-evolution.

"Because now we can (made possible by this design -this perspective -this situation"

Yes evolution.

How about a better design in the first place, if we were designed and of course I don't believe that at all.

"though we probably would not get much farther on our own without utterly destroying the design."

Not so sure about that and where we are going.

Have you ever seen this?

Can You Live Forever
This enlightening and entertaining video takes a look at upcoming technologies that may in fact allow us to live to be a thousand years old, without looking like Yoda. It is presented by Adam Savage from the popular show Mythbusters and less popular but equally entertaining youtube show "Still untitled, the Adam Savage project".....What would it be like to be immortal? It's the year 2967 and Adam Savage is 1000 years old. He reflects on his long life revealing how science in the 21st century transformed his body, creating a supercharged cyber-human, allowing him to live forever.

 

[Etritonakin]

"Because now we can (made possible by this design -this perspective -this situation"

Yes evolution.

How about a better design in the first place, if we were designed and of course I don't believe that at all.

"though we probably would not get much farther on our own without utterly destroying the design."

Not so sure about that and where we are going.

Have you ever seen this?

Even from the perspective of evolution, the body of a life form -it's interface -is about complementary to its mental capacity -or lack thereof.

For example... What good are opposable thumbs if a life form cannot employ them?

Humans, however, presently have a far greater mental capacity compared to their interface than 'animals'.

We have made up some of the difference by making tools -which are, in essence, extensions of our bodies -but it stands to reason that the body itself should eventually change to make better use of mental capacity.

This would essentially mean internalizing the capabilities of tools which are presently external.

If evolution is a game of chance, it might never happen -but our mental capacity enables self-evolution.

However, "natural" evolution maintains a balance -and our mental capacity can also destroy that balance -not to mention all life on earth.

So, we become responsible for balance -and even the overall state and direction of things -including evolution.

Man has a tendency to not do ALL of the math -partly because we do not know how to do ALL of the math, partly because we are irresponsible.

We are irresponsible as individuals, and have found it as yet impossible to act in a responsible way collectively.

The present "imperfect" state of our bodies and other things has actually kept our ability to destroy temporarily in check -therefore it has been beneficial -perfect for its purpose (survival -if evolution can be said to have any purpose -though our desire to survive can be considered).

If the fate of evolution is now in our hands, we have some monumental tasks ahead of us.

The major issue which needs to be addressed is the balance between individuality and unity -which necessitates universal law -which is, in turn, based on an accurate understanding of the environment and all who share it.

Another is maintaining that balance and adherence to the agreed-upon universal law over successive generations.

Yet another is the course and timing of our collective self-evolution. We would be making choices for generations which followed.

Our survival as we self-evolve depends upon other life forms, and even our mental state and happiness depend on a pleasant environment.

If we increased our lifespan, it would require consideration of space, resources, etc... and if we increased our inherent abilities, it would require certainty that appropriate order could be maintained, etc., etc.

One of the reasons that I find the bible so fascinating is that the plan it outlines (if even "believers" would actually read it in any depth) addresses every last issue, removes uncertainty and chance -and makes short work of those issues by addressing personal and collective responsibility first, then provides the upgrades to our bodies complementary to our level of responsibility and mental ability.
It addresses the problems of space, resources, effective universal government/law, an available source of all knowledge, resurrection of those who lived in the past (who would not benefit from future human self-evolution) etc., etc. -even control over cosmic events.

Self-evolution/human responsibility alone -factoring in all variables and certainties -would be a long, drawn-out struggle at best -and a horrible nightmare of botched attempts and conflict at worst -if we survived at all.

 

[Sapiens]

For example... What good are opposable thumbs if a life form cannot employ them?

No! Hardware before software, true for evolution also.

 

[Etritonakin]

No! Hardware before software, true for evolution also.

I did say "about" -as in pretty much -complementary.....

I did not say that an animal like the orangutan, for example, knew what to do with opposable thumbs before they had them -and they still have no clue what is possible with them (yet they employ them in a manner complementary to their mental capacity)....

But you can't really believe our human hardware itself is more capable than our software.

The fact that we are not merely subject to evolution is a game-changer.

We can imagine a far more capable body than we have -learn how to bring it about -and seek to make it a reality.

Software before hardware in that case.

 

[Sapiens]

I did say "about" -as in pretty much -complementary.....

I did not say that an animal like the orangutan, for example, knew what to do with opposable thumbs before they had them -and they still have no clue what is possible with them (yet they employ them in a manner complementary to their mental capacity)....

But you can't really believe our human hardware itself is more capable than our software.

The fact that we are not merely subject to evolution is a game-changer.

We can imagine a far more capable body than we have -learn how to bring it about -and seek to make it a reality.

Software before hardware in that case.

But that's the difference between engineering people (designed) and evolving people (no designer). Evolution is always hardware first, bipedalism, thumbs, you name it.

 

[psychoslice]

Yes there is no god, and whatever has happened to bring us where we are now, is nothing more than evolution, simple.