Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
July 13, 2014 at 2:06 pm (This post was last modified: July 13, 2014 at 2:08 pm by Mudhammam.)
So I just began reading Thomas Hobbes' epic Leviathan and this passage stood out to me as an intriguing angle from which to apply the design argument, in a way that I think is far more compelling than the standard version that looks to cosmology or biology. I'll quote the pertinent chapter at large; the parts I specifically found engaging are in bold.
CHAPTER III. OF THE CONSEQUENCE OR TRAYNE OF IMAGINATIONS
By Consequence, or Trayne of Thoughts, I understand that succession of one Thought to another, which is called (to distinguish it from Discourse in words) Mentall Discourse.
When a man thinketh on any thing whatsoever, His next Thought after, is not altogether so casuall as it seems to be. Not every Thought to every Thought succeeds indifferently. But as wee have no Imagination, whereof we have not formerly had Sense, in whole, or in parts; so we have no Transition from one Imagination to another, whereof we never had the like before in our Senses. The reason whereof is this. All Fancies are Motions within us, reliques of those made in the Sense: And those motions that immediately succeeded one another in the sense, continue also together after Sense: In so much as the former comming again to take place, and be praedominant, the later followeth, by coherence of the matter moved, is such manner, as water upon a plain Table is drawn which way any one part of it is guided by the finger. But because in sense, to one and the same thing perceived, sometimes one thing, sometimes another succeedeth, it comes to passe in time, that in the Imagining of any thing, there is no certainty what we shall Imagine next; Onely this is certain, it shall be something that succeeded the same before, at one time or another.
Trayne Of Thoughts Unguided
This Trayne of Thoughts, or Mentall Discourse, is of two sorts. The first is Unguided, Without Designee, and inconstant; Wherein there is no Passionate Thought, to govern and direct those that follow, to it self, as the end and scope of some desire, or other passion: In which case the thoughts are said to wander, and seem impertinent one to another, as in a Dream. Such are Commonly the thoughts of men, that are not onely without company, but also without care of any thing; though even then their Thoughts are as busie as at other times, but without harmony; as the sound which a Lute out of tune would yeeld to any man; or in tune, to one that could not play. And yet in this wild ranging of the mind, a man may oft-times perceive the way of it, and the dependance of one thought upon another. For in a Discourse of our present civill warre, what could seem more impertinent, than to ask (as one did) what was the value of a Roman Penny? Yet the Cohaerence to me was manifest enough. For the Thought of the warre, introduced the Thought of the delivering up the King to his Enemies; The Thought of that, brought in the Thought of the delivering up of Christ; and that again the Thought of the 30 pence, which was the price of that treason: and thence easily followed that malicious question; and all this in a moment of time; for Thought is quick.
Trayne Of Thoughts Regulated
The second is more constant; as being Regulated by some desire, and designee. For the impression made by such things as wee desire, or feare, is strong, and permanent, or, (if it cease for a time,) of quick return: so strong it is sometimes, as to hinder and break our sleep. From Desire, ariseth the Thought of some means we have seen produce the like of that which we ayme at; and from the thought of that, the thought of means to that mean; and so continually, till we come to some beginning within our own power. And because the End, by the greatnesse of the impression, comes often to mind, in case our thoughts begin to wander, they are quickly again reduced into the way: which observed by one of the seven wise men, made him give men this praecept, which is now worne out, Respice Finem; that is to say, in all your actions, look often upon what you would have, as the thing that directs all your thoughts in the way to attain it.
Remembrance
The Trayn of regulated Thoughts is of two kinds; One, when of an effect imagined, wee seek the causes, or means that produce it: and this is common to Man and Beast. The other is, when imagining any thing whatsoever, wee seek all the possible effects, that can by it be produced; that is to say, we imagine what we can do with it, when wee have it. Of which I have not at any time seen any signe, but in man onely; for this is a curiosity hardly incident to the nature of any living creature that has no other Passion but sensuall, such as are hunger, thirst, lust, and anger. In summe, the Discourse of the Mind, when it is governed by designee, is nothing but Seeking, or the faculty of Invention, which the Latines call Sagacitas, and Solertia; a hunting out of the causes, of some effect, present or past; or of the effects, of some present or past cause, sometimes a man seeks what he hath lost; and from that place, and time, wherein hee misses it, his mind runs back, from place to place, and time to time, to find where, and when he had it; that is to say, to find some certain, and limited time and place, in which to begin a method of seeking. Again, from thence, his thoughts run over the same places and times, to find what action, or other occasion might make him lose it. This we call Remembrance, or Calling to mind: the Latines call it Reminiscentia, as it were a Re-Conning of our former actions.
Does "Discourse of the Mind," which "when it is governed by designee, is nothing but Seeking," suggest something of design inherent to some greater principle or function of nature that science hasn't yet articulated? Or does Natural Selection perfectly account for the leaps and bounds our species has acquired in terms of intelligence and "designed" structures of thought?
He who loves God cannot endeavour that God should love him in return - Baruch Spinoza
RE: Is "discourse of the mind" evidence of design?
July 13, 2014 at 2:25 pm
(July 13, 2014 at 2:06 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: So I just began reading Thomas Hobbes' epic Leviathan and this passage stood out to me as an intriguing angle from which to apply the design argument, in a way that I think is far more compelling than the standard version that looks to cosmology or biology. I'll quote the pertinent chapter at large; the parts I specifically found engaging are in bold.
CHAPTER III. OF THE CONSEQUENCE OR TRAYNE OF IMAGINATIONS
By Consequence, or Trayne of Thoughts, I understand that succession of one Thought to another, which is called (to distinguish it from Discourse in words) Mentall Discourse.
When a man thinketh on any thing whatsoever, His next Thought after, is not altogether so casuall as it seems to be. Not every Thought to every Thought succeeds indifferently. But as wee have no Imagination, whereof we have not formerly had Sense, in whole, or in parts; so we have no Transition from one Imagination to another, whereof we never had the like before in our Senses. The reason whereof is this. All Fancies are Motions within us, reliques of those made in the Sense: And those motions that immediately succeeded one another in the sense, continue also together after Sense: In so much as the former comming again to take place, and be praedominant, the later followeth, by coherence of the matter moved, is such manner, as water upon a plain Table is drawn which way any one part of it is guided by the finger. But because in sense, to one and the same thing perceived, sometimes one thing, sometimes another succeedeth, it comes to passe in time, that in the Imagining of any thing, there is no certainty what we shall Imagine next; Onely this is certain, it shall be something that succeeded the same before, at one time or another.
Trayne Of Thoughts Unguided
This Trayne of Thoughts, or Mentall Discourse, is of two sorts. The first is Unguided, Without Designee, and inconstant; Wherein there is no Passionate Thought, to govern and direct those that follow, to it self, as the end and scope of some desire, or other passion: In which case the thoughts are said to wander, and seem impertinent one to another, as in a Dream. Such are Commonly the thoughts of men, that are not onely without company, but also without care of any thing; though even then their Thoughts are as busie as at other times, but without harmony; as the sound which a Lute out of tune would yeeld to any man; or in tune, to one that could not play. And yet in this wild ranging of the mind, a man may oft-times perceive the way of it, and the dependance of one thought upon another. For in a Discourse of our present civill warre, what could seem more impertinent, than to ask (as one did) what was the value of a Roman Penny? Yet the Cohaerence to me was manifest enough. For the Thought of the warre, introduced the Thought of the delivering up the King to his Enemies; The Thought of that, brought in the Thought of the delivering up of Christ; and that again the Thought of the 30 pence, which was the price of that treason: and thence easily followed that malicious question; and all this in a moment of time; for Thought is quick.
Trayne Of Thoughts Regulated
The second is more constant; as being Regulated by some desire, and designee. For the impression made by such things as wee desire, or feare, is strong, and permanent, or, (if it cease for a time,) of quick return: so strong it is sometimes, as to hinder and break our sleep. From Desire, ariseth the Thought of some means we have seen produce the like of that which we ayme at; and from the thought of that, the thought of means to that mean; and so continually, till we come to some beginning within our own power. And because the End, by the greatnesse of the impression, comes often to mind, in case our thoughts begin to wander, they are quickly again reduced into the way: which observed by one of the seven wise men, made him give men this praecept, which is now worne out, Respice Finem; that is to say, in all your actions, look often upon what you would have, as the thing that directs all your thoughts in the way to attain it.
Remembrance
The Trayn of regulated Thoughts is of two kinds; One, when of an effect imagined, wee seek the causes, or means that produce it: and this is common to Man and Beast. The other is, when imagining any thing whatsoever, wee seek all the possible effects, that can by it be produced; that is to say, we imagine what we can do with it, when wee have it. Of which I have not at any time seen any signe, but in man onely; for this is a curiosity hardly incident to the nature of any living creature that has no other Passion but sensuall, such as are hunger, thirst, lust, and anger. In summe, the Discourse of the Mind, when it is governed by designee, is nothing but Seeking, or the faculty of Invention, which the Latines call Sagacitas, and Solertia; a hunting out of the causes, of some effect, present or past; or of the effects, of some present or past cause, sometimes a man seeks what he hath lost; and from that place, and time, wherein hee misses it, his mind runs back, from place to place, and time to time, to find where, and when he had it; that is to say, to find some certain, and limited time and place, in which to begin a method of seeking. Again, from thence, his thoughts run over the same places and times, to find what action, or other occasion might make him lose it. This we call Remembrance, or Calling to mind: the Latines call it Reminiscentia, as it were a Re-Conning of our former actions.
Does "Discourse of the Mind," which "when it is governed by designee, is nothing but Seeking," suggest something of design inherent to some greater principle or function of nature that science hasn't yet articulated? Or does Natural Selection perfectly account for the leaps and bounds our species has acquired in terms of intelligence and "designed" structures of thought?
Dead philosophy does not nor will replace scientific method. DNA and natural selection explain our species and all life for that matter.
RE: Is "discourse of the mind" evidence of design?
July 13, 2014 at 3:02 pm (This post was last modified: July 13, 2014 at 3:05 pm by Mudhammam.)
(July 13, 2014 at 2:25 pm)Brian37 Wrote: Dead philosophy does not nor will replace scientific method. DNA and natural selection explain our species and all life for that matter.
I don't disagree but might one argue that the scientific method, DNA, and natural selection are in some sense creations of a design within mind?
As of yet there is no answer to the question: "What must nature, including man, be like in order that science be possible at all...What must the world be like in order that man may know it?" (Thomas Kuhn).
He who loves God cannot endeavour that God should love him in return - Baruch Spinoza
RE: Is "discourse of the mind" evidence of design?
July 13, 2014 at 4:27 pm
Is there some other way you could put this? I'm not sure from your post where design fits in.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
RE: Is "discourse of the mind" evidence of design?
July 13, 2014 at 4:44 pm
We live in a universe amenable to investigation. That a being capable of that investigation should arise strikes me not so much of evidence of design, but precisely what we should expect from natural selection.
Organisms evolve to fit their environment, and to adapt to changes in that environment: fishes in freshwater caves evolve to a lack of eyes; animals on savannahs evolve distance vision. Human beings evolve investigative abilities, because we need to be able to investigate the universe.
Had the universe been deliberately designed, and humans deliberately designed to investigate it, it seems that the investigation would have concluded millennia ago.
Why you, via Hobbes, seem to be advocating is really no different that typical creationist rhetoric which boils down to, 'I cannot understand this, therefore God is responsible for it.'
Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax
RE: Is "discourse of the mind" evidence of design?
July 13, 2014 at 5:20 pm (This post was last modified: July 13, 2014 at 5:24 pm by Mudhammam.)
(July 13, 2014 at 4:44 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Why you, via Hobbes, seem to be advocating is really no different that typical creationist rhetoric which boils down to, 'I cannot understand this, therefore God is responsible for it.'
Boru
I suppose it might be more apt to say that simple basic mechanisms can result in configurations that appear designed. Is that an arbitrary assertion put forth by human brains or does some genuinely designed function--the struggle for survival, say--play a role? And could that be reducible at some point in the past into something like a dumb, unintelligent, single rule? That does seems plausible in other areas, such as the breakdown of complex organisms into lesser (but still) complex individual cells and then atoms and so forth, so I suppose that runs counter to my point on design, and is even likely typically recognized as so.
Perhaps Hobbes would extend something like that to mean a Divine being, and the OP was phrased along the lines of standard design arguments, but I tend to think design, or the appearance of in nature, can be discussed irrespective of a personal or incorporeal designer.
He who loves God cannot endeavour that God should love him in return - Baruch Spinoza
RE: Is "discourse of the mind" evidence of design?
July 13, 2014 at 5:30 pm (This post was last modified: July 13, 2014 at 5:32 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
Trouble is finding anything in nature that even has the appearance of design.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
RE: Is "discourse of the mind" evidence of design?
July 13, 2014 at 6:28 pm (This post was last modified: July 13, 2014 at 6:28 pm by Dystopia.)
Studied Hobbes one year ago for political science, but I have never read the "Leviathan", I didn't enjoy Hobbes' ideas and perspective quite much. To answer your question, I don't think there is proof for design, natural selection fits perfectly.
(July 13, 2014 at 5:30 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Trouble is finding anything in nature that even has the appearance of design.
The theist could make the case of a tree being proof of intelligent design..
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you
RE: Is "discourse of the mind" evidence of design?
July 13, 2014 at 6:49 pm
(July 13, 2014 at 3:02 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote:
(July 13, 2014 at 2:25 pm)Brian37 Wrote: Dead philosophy does not nor will replace scientific method. DNA and natural selection explain our species and all life for that matter.
I don't disagree but might one argue that the scientific method, DNA, and natural selection are in some sense creations of a design within mind?
As of yet there is no answer to the question: "What must nature, including man, be like in order that science be possible at all...What must the world be like in order that man may know it?" (Thomas Kuhn).
Please stop. This is bullshit. A hurricane does not need Poseidon as a cause. Nor does evolution or the universe need a cognition to start it. "All this" is a result of natural laws, not products manufactured by magical beings, cognitions or entities.
The world does not have to be what we want. We have to adapt ourselves through observation and testing and peer review. That is how we gain better understanding. Don't add superfluous bullshit woo to it.
RE: Is "discourse of the mind" evidence of design?
July 13, 2014 at 7:22 pm
And as far as design goes, I'm not even remotely an engineer. If I can look at something in the natural world and come up with a better design for it, then that something clearly isn't the design of a higher power.
Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax
