Detecting design or intent in nature

[BlackMason]

Someone here gave us a Matt Dillahunty explanation about the necessity of contrasting nature to determine design. So I'm not gonna write on that. Instead I want to make an argument against the teleology of nature.

1) Nature has goals or nature does not have goals.
2) There have been many creatures that have come into existence.
3) There have been many creatures that have since become extinct.
4) Extinction has no purpose.

Therefore nature has no goals.

I'm not sure about that argument.

Sometimes we design special tools, jigs, scaffolds, etc. when building something. Those things get discarded after we are done just like species of life go extinct, but that doesn't mean they weren't serving a goal.

Can you come up with an actual counter example? What I mean is what goal did dinosaurs have? Were they able to achieve that goal rendering them redundant justifying the extinction? Further, what goal do we humans have? Are we achieving that goal? Knowing this can possibly help us determine our species' useful life. Are we nearing our extinction based on our goal progress?

Also look at airplane designs. Cloth and canvas biplanes are extinct, but they were a stepping stone that served a goal. Or sometimes we build prototype airplanes that are not practical, but they allow us to test an idea.

These examples are poor. You are using circular reasoning. All these examples are inherently designed with the purpose of achieving a goal. I think I can leave it at that.

---

If everything needs a cause, what caused the first cause?

The need for a cause caused the first cause.