Intelligence of Design

[Iacchus]

So what is it about all these artificial limbs, artificial joints, pace-makers, hearing aids, eye correction devices and what not? Is it because man thinks he's capable of improving on the original design? In other words whose design exactly, does he think he's trying to improve upon? Obviously if there was no recognizable design in the first place, what on earth does he think he's trying to change?

Whereas if he does change it, surely he can't just impliment something arbitrarily and say, "Okay, that'll fix it." It has to be recognizable or, at the very least intelligible to the overall design, otherwise it won't work, right? Which is to say nothing happens arbitrarily and, it requires sophistication in order to make things work. Doesn't that suggest to you the possibility of Intelligence behind the Design? So, what exactly is a design anyway, if it wasn't laid out in an intelligent fashion? Indeed, how would we recognize it?

Or, perhaps what we should be asking is what is intelligence in the first place, when related to the overall scheme of things? Is it an independent process that exists outside of the Universe? Hmm ... Sounds too much like God now doesn't it? Or, could it be that the Universe follows the intelligence of the overall design, of which our intelligence is merely the outcropping or, manifestation of? Of course that doesn't leave us with much more of an option than to suggest Intelligence created intelligence either now does it?

 

[Pantastic]

You equate design with intelligence, which is a flawed premise.

I once found a splinter of wood left over from DIY which was the perfect shape to fit under the short leg of my desk and stop it wobbling. Does this imply a design? Did an intelligence cause the wood to splinter in that way? No, but yet its design was perfect for my needs.

 

[MRC_Hans]

Short and sweet. Thanks.

Hans

 

[Iacchus]

You equate design with intelligence, which is a flawed premise.

I once found a splinter of wood left over from DIY which was the perfect shape to fit under the short leg of my desk and stop it wobbling. Does this imply a design? Did an intelligence cause the wood to splinter in that way? No, but yet its design was perfect for my needs.

However, do realize that even the notion of this fits in quite keenly with the overall design of the Universe? Or, are you suggesting the design you implemented exists somewhere outside of the Universal realm of design?

In which case I ask, what is intelligence and, more importantly, where does it come from? In other words is the Universe intelligent, of which we are merely a manifestation of?

 

[Yahweh]

So, what exactly is a design anyway, if it wasn't laid out in an intelligent fashion?

Trial and error. Keep the good changes, dont think about arbitrary changes, and discard the bad changes.

Thats what we call blind design.

 

[Yahweh]

In which case I ask, what is intelligence and, more importantly, where does it come from?

There have been a great deal of individuals who have contemplated what intelligence is. It isnt necessarily a readily measurable quality, I'm sure of that. At the very least, I think intelligence, or at least one understanding of intelligence, is the ability to use reason to accomplish a purposeful goal.

Its origins, I would say, at the most basic level is merely what one gleans by observations of his environment.

In other words is the Universe intelligent, of which we are merely a manifestation of?

So, God is nothing more than the universe? That sounds like a rather atheistic concept if you ask me... a rose by another name...

 

[Iacchus]

Trial and error. Keep the good changes, dont think about arbitrary changes, and discard the bad changes.

Thats what we call blind design.

Yes, but what makes it so blind when we have the laws of phsyics to set the whole thing in motion and, guide it through the process? Whereas just because we may not understand the outcome of something, does not mean there was an original intent (or design) in the first place, does it?

 

[Yahweh]

Yes, but what makes it so blind when we have the laws of phsyics to set the whole thing in motion and, guide it through the process? Whereas just because we may not understand the outcome of something, does not mean there was an original intent (or cause) in the first place does it?

If the outcome of something looks like the sum of purely natural forces, then your question is metaphysical, and hence I dont think it can be given a meaningful answer.

And in such a case, the question of "intent" itself is an empty possibility. If I were to say "There is an intangible elf on my shoulder", would you be inclined to believe me? Or disbelieve me? If so, why? Strictly speaking, that intangible elf is an empty possibility, it cannot be detected by any scientific methods (as implied by the word "intangible") and cannot be defined in any rational or meaningful way (as a consequence of its intangibility). You cannot tell the difference between a world where this elf really did exist on my shoulder and one where the elf is nonexistent.

Likewise, I would consider undetectable "original intent" an empty possibility. And like the elf, it wouldnt make a difference whether it existed or not.

 

[Iacchus]

If the outcome of something looks like the sum of purely natural forces, then your question is metaphysical, and hence I dont think it can be given a meaningful answer.

The thing is, why is the Universe so structured, that it inevitably produces one thing, intelligence? Indeed, if the Universe wasn't structured, would intelligence exist? In which case we need to ask, what gives structure to the Universe if, not Intelligence Itself?

And in such a case, the question of "intent" itself is an empty possibility. If I were to say "There is an intangible elf on my shoulder", would you be inclined to believe me? Or disbelieve me? If so, why? Strictly speaking, that intangible elf is an empty possibility, it cannot be detected by any scientific methods (as implied by the word "intangible") and cannot be defined in any rational or meaningful way (as a consequence of its intangibility). You cannot tell the difference between a world where this elf really did exist on my shoulder and one where the elf is nonexistent.

All depends on whether you believe in the intangible or not.

Likewise, I would consider undetectable "original intent" an empty possibility. And like the elf, it wouldnt make a difference whether it existed or not.

And yet you have no problem working with the notion of cause-and-effect in your everyday life, right? Which, in effect states there's a beginning to everything, right?

 

[Iacchus]

There have been a great deal of individuals who have contemplated what intelligence is. It isnt necessarily a readily measurable quality, I'm sure of that. At the very least, I think intelligence, or at least one understanding of intelligence, is the ability to use reason to accomplish a purposeful goal.

Its origins, I would say, at the most basic level is merely what one gleans by observations of his environment.

It's certainly not possible without a brain though is it? And, since the brain is the by-product of its environment, then intelligence must be a by-product of the environment as well, right? So, doesn't that in effect say the environment is intelligent as well? Or else where does it come from?

So, God is nothing more than the universe? That sounds like a rather atheistic concept if you ask me... a rose by another name...

Much in the way energy permeates matter if, I'm not mistaken here, I would say God is the essence which permeates everything.

 

[brian0918]

Much in the way energy permeates matter if, I'm not mistaken here, I would say God is the essence which permeates everything.

What sort of units is this "essence" measured in? What is the flux of this essence through my fingernail? Is is comparable to solar neutrino flux? (100 billion per second)

If you cannot answer these questions, or even conceive of a way of answering these questions, how then can you come to the conclusion that this "essence" exists.

All of your posts seem to be just emotions set to words.

 

[Iacchus]

What sort of units is this "essence" measured in? What is the flux of this essence through my fingernail? Is is comparable to solar neutrino flux? (100 billion per second)

If you cannot answer these questions, or even conceive of a way of answering these questions, how then can you come to the conclusion that this "essence" exists.

Is it possible to observe that the sky is blue and watch the clouds pass by, without understanding the molecular structure of either the atmosphere or, the clouds? Why shoud it be any different with God then? Do I need the latest atomic accelerator to discover that God exists?

All of your posts seem to be just emotions set to words.

And why do you say this? Because it doesn't jive with what you're intellectually predisposed to thinking? Or, maybe I just like to have fun with what I do, so what?

 

[BillyTK]

Is there design in the way my cup falls to the floor when I let go of it? Perhaps it's a side-effect of a design to prevent us floating off the planet and into space? Perhaps the design of the planet is to give us something to stand on? Perhaps I'm anthropomorphising too much?

 

[Iacchus]

Is there design in the way my cup falls to the floor when I let go of it? Perhaps it's a side-effect of a design to prevent us floating off the planet and into space? Perhaps the design of the planet is to give us something to stand on? Perhaps I'm anthropomorphising too much?

Is there a design in the push-pull configuration of a stereo amplifier? Sure there is.

Whereas if gravity had no design (i.e., claim) on your cup would it fall on the floor?

 

[daenku32]

Much in the way energy permeates matter if, I'm not mistaken here, I would say God is the essence which permeates everything.

That's nice. Thinking that doesn't give much though.

 

[daenku32]

Is there a design in the push-pull configuration of a stereo amplifier? Sure there is.

Whereas if gravity had no design (i.e., claim) on your cup would it fall on the floor?

I doubt gravity was designed with the intent of braking or spilling Billy's cup. That sounds more like a bug in a program. (assuming gravity was designed)

 

[Batman Jr.]

I understand what you say, that intellect in the sense that a human possesses an intellect is just a bunch of iterations of simple algorithms, much as the "behavior," if you will, of nature can be deconstructed into a number of laws. This kind of thought is a foray into what is called pantheism, or a belief that observes the universe as "God." What is questionable, though, is if an intellect requires a sentience behind it.

 

[scribble]

I asked this last time, and as far as I can tell, the question stands:

Does anyone over the age of 15 buy into this bullplop?

Let's hear from anyone who thinks this is really good stuff.

 

[Batman Jr.]

I asked this last time, and as far as I can tell, the question stands:

Does anyone over the age of 15 buy into this bullplop?

Let's hear from anyone who thinks this is really good stuff.

I don't think it's convincing as something trying to point toward the existence of "God"; I do, however, believe the subject to be very interesting as a philosophical study on what intellect is and consequently what constitutes what we would call a "mind."

 

[Iacchus]

I doubt gravity was designed with the intent of braking or spilling Billy's cup. That sounds more like a bug in a program. (assuming gravity was designed)

Yes, but how do you know it wasn't designed in order to allow for the possibility? You can't escape from the fact that everything is contingent upon the design. Indeed, why does the ultimate outcropping of the design wind up with intelligence and, the inherent ability to recognize the very design itself? At the very least it suggests one thing, that the Universe is intelligent. Isn't that what they say, that man was created in order to give the Universe a means by which to look back at itself. Indeed!