Is "discourse of the mind" evidence of design?

[The Grand Nudger]

Nah, just thinking aloud, perhaps trying to fill in the large gaps that seem to exist in opposing philosophies and methodologies. I'm not really sure if there's an immediate application for viewing nature designed as such, except in backwards engineering the functions of body parts, but who knows? Perhaps the presumption that life is the necessary result of a type of design, borne by certain cosmuc forces, could be helpful in formulating a theory of life origins. That's all beyond me.

If life were a necessary result...don't you think we'd see more of it? Speaking of body parts, thats a great way to show the difference between what nature does, and what man does. We all have feet (most of us, I hope) - but would we actually build a foot the same way that feet have arisen through natural processes? No, not even remotely. We have that option, we actually approach a problem and define metrics. We test the designs and weigh them against each other. We know what we want an object to do. Nature isn't doing any of that. It threw a barrel full of darts at a wall that it didn't see, without even realizing it - and some of them stuck, a result which goes unnoticed by nature.

I suppose that what I'm trying to express, is that if nature is designed, or a designer - we aren't designing anything. If we are designing anything, then nature isn't designed or a designer. The word can't stand in for two entirely dissimilar and often contradictory processes. Trying to conceptualize anything in such a manner isn't likely, imo, to be very productive. It would be like wondering whether we might gain more insight about "hot" by conceptualizing it as "cold".