(December 26, 2015 at 1:23 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote:

(December 26, 2015 at 1:21 pm)pool Wrote: Wrong wrong. I'm not saying "that" achieved by random events have a design. I'm saying that it resembles a design.

So?

Do you agree that resemblance of a design can be considered as a design(not intelligent design)?

Like would you consider a house that was made by a set of random events which resembles a real house to be a house or would you not consider it a house?

I will have to seriously give up. We can't agree on the fundamentals of language here.

Thanks for the debate

(December 26, 2015 at 1:28 pm)pool Wrote:

(December 26, 2015 at 1:23 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: So?

Do you agree that resemblance of a design can be considered as a design(not intelligent design)?

Like would you consider a house that was made by a set of random events which resembles a real house to be a house or would you not consider it a house?

No. It wouldn't be designed, it would be something that happened that resembled something else. Like seeing a face in the shadows or bridges in weathered rocks it's down to our perception rather than design.

If a house that is built by humans and a house that was formed by random events are indistinguishable from each other then they are the same thing. If you think it's not the same thing, you're thinking too much into it.
It doesn't matter if the L.H.S is 5+1 or 7-1 the R.H.S 6 is same in both these instances. Nobody says the R.H.S in the first instant is addition 6 and in the second instance is subtraction 6. Just 6.

(December 26, 2015 at 2:00 pm)pool Wrote: If a house that is built by humans and a house that was formed by random events are indistinguishable from each other then they are the same thing. If you think it's not the same thing, you're thinking too much into it.
It doesn't matter if the L.H.S is 5+1 or 7-1 the R.H.S 6 is same in both these instances. Nobody says the R.H.S in the first instant is addition 6 and in the second instance is subtraction 6. Just 6.

No it is not.
A stone axe made by a human or hominid is designed, a stone shaped by nature that resembles a stone axe in every way is not. To have design you first need intent and a plan which random events do not have. Even if the random event has a sophisticated outcome and by pure chance conjours up a fully functioning spaceship with lace trimmed steering wheel it would not be designed, just very, very unlikely.

(December 26, 2015 at 2:09 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote:

(December 26, 2015 at 2:00 pm)pool Wrote: If a house that is built by humans and a house that was formed by random events are indistinguishable from each other then they are the same thing. If you think it's not the same thing, you're thinking too much into it.
It doesn't matter if the L.H.S is 5+1 or 7-1 the R.H.S 6 is same in both these instances. Nobody says the R.H.S in the first instant is addition 6 and in the second instance is subtraction 6. Just 6.

No it is not.
A stone axe made by a human or hominid is designed, a stone shaped by nature that resembles a stone axe in every way is not. To have design you first need intent and a plan which random events do not have. Even if the random event has a sophisticated outcome and by pure chance conjours up a fully functioning spaceship with lace trimmed steering wheel it would not be designed, just very, very unlikely.

I like that. You're good.
But I disagree that a design needs a plan. I agree about intent - the intent being "to impose certain critirea's, rules, constrainsts etc".
I can design a game without planning how I'm going to approach the design process. I'm sure because I actually did that. lol

(December 26, 2015 at 2:18 pm)pool Wrote:

(December 26, 2015 at 2:09 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: No it is not.
A stone axe made by a human or hominid is designed, a stone shaped by nature that resembles a stone axe in every way is not. To have design you first need intent and a plan which random events do not have. Even if the random event has a sophisticated outcome and by pure chance conjours up a fully functioning spaceship with lace trimmed steering wheel it would not be designed, just very, very unlikely.

I like that. You're good.
But I disagree that a design needs a plan. I agree about intent - the intent being "to impose certain critirea's, rules, constrainsts etc".
I can design a game without planning how I'm going to approach the design process. I'm sure because I actually did that. lol

No, evolution does not have even an intent. It is a process, and our observations of it allow us to describe in words those processes. Just like a hurricane has no intent, yet we can predict through scientific tools the conditions that lead to them and the paths they may take.

There is no design in evolution or intent. There are words we use to describe the process. But it really has no other goal other than to adapt, some life does and other life goes extinct and all life eventually will die on this planet. 

I see no need to add extra language to evolution in an attempt to compete with the religious. Evolution does and that's it. There is no apex to life or ladder life climbs up. There are simply different adaptations that manifest due to conditions of the genes and environment.

Somebody might have tried this already, but let's see if this helps:


de·sign
dəˈzīn/Submit


noun
1.
a plan or drawing produced to show the look and function or workings of a building, garment, or other object before it is built or made.
"he has just unveiled his design for the new museum"
synonyms: plan, blueprint, drawing, sketch, outline, map, plot, diagram, draft, representation, scheme, model
"a design for the offices"
2.
purpose, planning, or intention that exists or is thought to exist behind an action, fact, or material object.
"the appearance of design in the universe"
synonyms: intention, aim, purpose, plan, intent, objective, object, goal, end, target; More


verb
1.
decide upon the look and functioning of (a building, garment, or other object), typically by making a detailed drawing of it.
"a number of architectural students were designing a factory"
synonyms: plan, outline, map out, draft, draw More


Every bit of that has to do with planning, purpose, intent, and the direct involvement of sentient beings. If you're saying that the word "design" doesn't necessarily involve a plan or a designer, you're wrong on both counts because that's simply not what the word means.


Also, it doesn't matter if you plan out how you intend to approach the design process. Designing is an act of planning.

(December 26, 2015 at 12:41 pm)Stimbo Wrote:

(December 23, 2015 at 11:40 pm)Minimalist Wrote: If there was a "designer" he sucks balls.

Which is a good trick, especially with chronic backache. I might be prepared to worship anyone who could do that.

When you become an old fart the balls, or more accurately the sack, tends migrate. Depending on age, really not that much of a trick. Head down on an incline would do it for some.

(December 26, 2015 at 10:53 am)pool Wrote:

(December 26, 2015 at 10:48 am)Evie Wrote: No thanks

Reality has no design... nature has no mind.

I agree that nature has no mind. I don't understand why you would bring that up though, I hadn't said that nature has a mind in any of my posts.

You clearly misunderstand what Evie means by this.