A Working Draft Design Argument

[chimp3]

Do you compare "author designed" to "not designed"? A book or computer to a rock?

Sure, rocks don't assign meanings and values.

Are rocks a part of reality?

[Acrobat]

Sure, rocks don't assign meanings and values.

Are rocks a part of reality?

Sure.

[downbeatplumb]

I don't see how you've established that reality possesses values and meanings ultimately rooted in some first cause. Causality need not require intentionality.

What ultimately assigns values and meaning in a deterministic universe?

Things don't have meaning they just "are".

[Anomalocaris]

A set of neurological circuits that were configured to conceives of value and meaning and assign them to some object or concepts.   Nothing more.

A set of neurological circuits that were configured to conceives of value and meaning and assign them to some object or concepts.   Nothing more.

(October 13, 2019 at 11:13 pm)

Equally true here as well:
“A set of neurological circuits that were configured to conceive truth, and assign “truth” to some objects or concepts.


Not to mention that the values and meanings we hold are a product of environmental factors that ultimately determine what you do or don’t value, what you assign meaning to. Your neurological circuits are just the strings on a puppet, that act in accordance with the environment that pulls them.

Appealing to our neurotical circuits as that which assigns meaning, is like saying the strings of a puppet decide where it should move.

You’re still failing to point out what pulls the strings, what actually assigns meaning and values to things.
[/quote]


The rhetorical equivalent of Random chemical reaction further up the strings cause them to appear to go into tension or loosen, which you then childishly interpret as purposed pulling of the strings by some intelligent being with a goal, just to satisfy your infantile longing to pretend there is some all powerful sky daddy for you to fall back on.

[GrandizerII]

We are determined to assign. That's what I'm saying.

That which determines assign, in my other examples it would be the programmer and the author not their characters.

For us, our environment assigns that which possess value, that which holds meaning, not us.

Nature doesn't assign anything. What it does is naturalistically provide us with the resources (via blind processes such as evolution) that allow us to be able to do the assigning.

That, at least, is how a typical naturalist would probably answer. If you wish to refute this with your argument, you're going to have to follow my suggestion rather than continue to ignore it.

[chimp3]

Are rocks a part of reality?

Sure.

How does that fit into P4?

[Acrobat]

Sure.

How does that fit into P4?

P4-All preceding factors, have preceding factors of their own, until one reaches a point which posses no preceding factors, i.e a first cause, or a type of uncaused singularity, that’s the ultimate determining cause of all causes, all knowledge, all past and future, events, all values and meanings, etc..

Rocks are caused by x, y, z (Volcanos erupting, sediments compacting) x, y,z is caused by l, f,p, etc.. etc... to a point which no causal explanation is possible, an uncaused cause.

[chimp3]

How does that fit into P4?

P4-All preceding factors, have preceding factors of their own, until one reaches a point which posses no preceding factors, i.e a first cause, or a type of uncaused singularity, that’s the ultimate determining cause of all causes, all knowledge, all past and future, events, all values and meanings, etc..

Rocks are caused by x, y, z (Volcanos erupting, sediments compacting) x, y,z is caused by l, f,p, etc.. etc... to a point which no causal explanation is possible, an uncaused cause.

"all past and future events"? Rock formation is not a series of events?

[GrandizerII]

P1- Intentionality gives things value and meaning. Novels possess intrinsic values and meaning, as a result of being authored, designed, endowed by their authors to posses such elements.

P2-If reality possess value and meaning, we can use logic to infer a cause, from an effect. I.E. That which possess values and meaning, indicate intentionality, authorship, design, etc..

P3-Determinism is true. To ask for proof of determinism, implies it’s true. The question itself requires determinism to be true, preceding factors to reach x conclusion, the conclusion is drawn from previously existing causes.

P4-All preceding factors, have preceding factors of their own, until one reaches a point which posses no preceding factors, i.e a first cause, or a type of  uncaused singularity, that’s the ultimate determining cause of all causes, all knowledge, all past and future, events, all values and meanings, etc..

P5- Since reality possess values and meanings, that are ultimately rooted in the first cause, reality is an intentional work, authored designed, a novel.

I'm going to modify the argument according to my understanding. Correct me if I word something wrong. Note premises won't necessarily match yours, but the argument should hopefully be the same overall.

P1) Something indicates intentionality if values and meanings are assignable to it and all that it contains.

P2) If values and meanings are assignable to reality and all that it contains, reality indicates intentionality.

P3) If something indicates intentionality, then this intentionality is grounded in a being that is apart from (or independent of) this something and is able to assign values and meanings.

C) Reality, indicating intentionality, must have this intentionality grounded in a cause that is apart from (or independent of) it and is able to assign values and meanings.

Unless I'm mistaken, this appears to be a more clearly valid argument.

The question is whether the argument is sound. In this case, I sense that the problem is with P3 of this modified argument.

[Pat Mustard]

P1- Intentionality gives things value and meaning. Novels possess intrinsic values and meaning, as a result of being authored, designed, endowed by their authors to posses such elements.

P2-If reality possess value and meaning, we can use logic to infer a cause, from an effect. I.E. That which possess values and meaning, indicate intentionality, authorship, design, etc..

P3-Determinism is true. To ask for proof of determinism, implies it’s true. The question itself requires determinism to be true, preceding factors to reach x conclusion, the conclusion is drawn from previously existing causes.

P4-All preceding factors, have preceding factors of their own, until one reaches a point which posses no preceding factors, i.e a first cause, or a type of  uncaused singularity, that’s the ultimate determining cause of all causes, all knowledge, all past and future, events, all values and meanings, etc..

P5- Since reality possess values and meanings, that are ultimately rooted in the first cause, reality is an intentional work, authored designed, a novel.

If I were trying to get to "evidence for design" I wouldn't be starting from here.