(December 26, 2015 at 12:00 am)Stimbo Wrote: Can I ask if you are thinking that the laws of physics are proscriptive, as in "thou shalt conserve energy, on penalty of punishment" or similar?

Dafaq? Is that how you think I think? O.o Wow I must look like a complete idiot if you guys think that's what I mean. Nobody's going to give punishment or butt slap. What I think is more along the lines of "There are laws of physics and you can't defy them." - which implies imposed rules, the system being our world would then imply there is a design.

I was asking just for information. I didn't want to put words into your mouth. I think you know me well enough on the boards now to know that's how I roll. Get out of my throat, please, and don't ever jump down it again when I try to help out.

(December 26, 2015 at 12:11 am)Stimbo Wrote: I was asking just for information. I didn't want to put words into your mouth. I think you know me well enough on the boards now to know that's how I roll. Get out of my throat, please, and don't ever jump down it again when I try to help out.

I didn't mean to offend. I was just quite surprised anyone would think it as even a possibility for me to think something along those lines. Sawyy

At the risk of dragging this out, I was actually aiming to ensure that people don't think you think that.

(December 25, 2015 at 11:50 pm)pool Wrote:

(December 25, 2015 at 8:27 pm)mh.brewer Wrote: Prove god first. Lets not put the cart before the horse.

God and intelligent design has something in common. I'm not saying that I believe if the design that is present was performed by intelligent beings, just that there is a design - which has nothing to do with God.
People seem to think that if they admit there is a design then they will be tricked into also agreeing with intelligent design - No they won't. Why?
Because a design doesn't necessarily imply intelligent design as a design can be achieved by random events too.

You're using the word design in multiple senses simultaneously.

Quote:1. A plan or scheme conceived in the mind and intended for subsequent execution; the preliminary conception of an idea that is to be carried into effect by action; a project.

Oxford English Dictionary

This type of design cannot be the product of random events; that's antithetical to the very definition.

(December 26, 2015 at 12:58 am)Jörmungandr Wrote:

(December 25, 2015 at 11:50 pm)pool Wrote: God and intelligent design has something in common. I'm not saying that I believe if the design that is present was performed by intelligent beings, just that there is a design - which has nothing to do with God.
People seem to think that if they admit there is a design then they will be tricked into also agreeing with intelligent design - No they won't. Why?
Because a design doesn't necessarily imply intelligent design as a design can be achieved by random events too.

You're using the word design in multiple senses simultaneously.

Quote:1. A plan or scheme conceived in the mind and intended for subsequent execution; the preliminary conception of an idea that is to be carried into effect by action; a project.

Oxford English Dictionary

This type of design cannot be the product of random events; that's antithetical to the very definition.

1. Please explain how I'm using the word design with multiple senses.
2. I would suggest not to copy paste definitions out of websites. I was scrutinized for doing that in my very 1st thread here. Words like supernatural, atheism and perhaps design are better left alone without copy pasta.
3. I do believe a design can be a product of random events. If I'm wrong then I guess I believe in intelligent design.

If the argument is that the Universe is so complex that it must have been designed, then the designer would also have to be fairly complex, wouldn't he?


If complexity demands a designer, and the designer himself is complex enough to create a Universe, then the designer himself must have been designed and created by something else.


If the designer, in his complexity, does not have to be designed by a creator, then why should the Universe?


If everything but the designer has to be designed by a creator, then that's special pleading.

(December 26, 2015 at 2:39 am)Redbeard The Pink Wrote: If the argument is that the Universe is so complex that it must have been designed, then the designer would also have to be fairly complex,  wouldn't he?


If complexity demands a designer, and the designer himself is complex enough to create a Universe,  then the designer himself must have been designed and created by something else.


If the designer, in his complexity, does not have to be designed by a creator, then why should the Universe?


If everything but the designer has to be designed by a creator, then that's special pleading.

A design can be caused by random events too. A designer doesn't exactly have to be a person or an intelligent being living in the sky in heaven xD

I think you may be misled between "designed" and "designoid" (living systems in nature [which] look as though they [...] were designed but can be explained naturalistically".

(December 26, 2015 at 2:51 am)Stimbo Wrote: I think you may be misled between "designed" and "designoid" (living systems in nature [which] look as though they [...] were designed but can be explained naturalistically".

Thanks. I did some digging and found this article http://arn.org/docs/williams/pw_purposeoflife.htm
I'm currently giving it a read. I'll try to understand what designoid is to clarify if that's what I really mean and get back to you.