The Constraints of Design

I don't know if your Designer is limited to the universe or if it's working within a multiverse system. If it's the latter, then there are no constraints to the Designer and this just happens to be a universe, in a multiverse system, where the proper conditions for life manifested. Thats not to say that no other universe within the multiverse systems has life and it only appears in ours, but since we don't know I don't see the point in speculating. But it could very well be possible, if not down right normal, for there to be a multiverse designed by 1 Designer without any constraints and where many of the universes have produced life.To conclude, IMO, in a multiverse system I see no reason why a Designer would have any constraints.However, to me this would rule out purpose, unless we view the Designer as a chemist of sorts, working with many variables for the purpose of design. Edited by onifre, : No reason given.

---

"All great truths begin as blasphemies""I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky

Nor am I. I guess I may have misunderstood the OP, I though a 'Designer' was aleady established. Also, I believe you are making an argument against the IDer proposed by the Discovery Institute. An IDer that is constantly intervening in nature. I do not side with anything like that. I was proposing a Designer that works with the laws of physics, but is not constrained by them.So I was not proposing a Designer based off of evidence that I have seen, I thought you said there was a Designer and what in nature can give evidence that said Designer has constraints.My bad

---

"All great truths begin as blasphemies""I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky

Yeah after re-reading the OP I realized this very thing, my bad I don't suppost ID, nor the idea of a required Designer, however, I would say that intervention by a Designer doesn't necessarily have to be visable, nor understandable, to 1 specific species, in 1 particular corner of the universe. The intervention may be completely un-noticable and thus no evidence for intervention would ever be seen. Again I do not support the ID movement. Again, you're limited in your ability to comprehend reality. A Designer that intervenes does not have to be noticable in our reality. I agree. If all we are going with is what we can determine as funtion or purpose, then NO, no such Designer is evident. But, and I think you and I were in agreement here with Dawkins, that I'm a 6 on the atheist scale. One of the reasons that I would consider myself a 6 is because my only understanding of reality is how I, or rather we as humans, perceive it. If reality can be perceived in a different way, I have no idea what that way may be, maybe all of the evidence for funtion and purpose get revealed. I would say that that is the only reason one would require a Designer. How do we know that does not exist? This is just 1 planet. Surely you don't suggest that a flying elephant is impossible? Perhaps on another planet bi-pedal monkeys that speak English is a ridiculuos idea, and yet... ID is wrong as proposed by the ID movement, however, the reality and nature that we as humans on the planet Earth perceive says nothing about the possibilities, and therefore places no constraints on a Designer. Again, I am not talking about the ID movements Designer. You are absolutly right, so please ignore my entire post Edited by onifre, : spellingEdited by onifre, : more shit to add...

---

"All great truths begin as blasphemies""I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky

Just to play devil's advocate, what if the design was an evolutionary program? The target would be evolved species, however, with no specific design in mind.I know we are talknig about design as per the ID movement but they don't seem to be engaging in any debate on this thread so, I thought I'd strike up any kind of debate.

---

"All great truths begin as blasphemies""I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky

I mean something a bit more sophisticated than that, something like Richard Dawkins' Biomorph Land Program,Kevin Kelly -- Chapter 14: In the Library of Form

quote:

---

In 1985, Dawkins invented a universe he called "Biomorph Land." Biomorph Land is the space of possible biological shapes constructed with short straight lines and branches. It was the first computer-generated library of possible forms that could be searched by breeding.

---

quote:

---

The first day he got the program running, Dawkins spent an exhilarating hour rummaging through the nearest shelves of his Borgian Library. Progressing a mutation at a time, he came upon unexpected arrangements of stem, stick, and trunk. Here were odd trees nature had never claimed. And line drawings of bushes, grass, and flowers that never were. Echoing the dual metaphor of evolution and libraries, Dawkins wrote in The Blind Watchmaker, "When you first evolve a new creature by artificial selection in the computer model, it feels like a creative process. So it is, indeed. But what you are really doing is finding the creature, for it is, in a mathematical sense, already sitting in its own place in the genetic space of Biomorph Land."

---

quote:

---

Dawkins was astonished: "When I wrote the program I never imagined it would evolve anything but treelike shapes. I had hoped for weeping willows, poplars, and cedars of Lebanon."

​

Now there were insects everywhere. Dawkins was too excited to eat that evening. He spent more hours discovering amazingly complex creatures looking like scorpions and water spiders and even frogs. He said later, "I was almost feverish with excitement. I cannot convey the exaltation I felt of exploring a land which I had supposedly made. Nothing in my biologist's background, nothing in my 20 years of programming computers, and nothing in my wildest dreams, prepared me for what actually emerged on the screen."

---

Those where just a few quotes, the whole article explains it in detail. But, what im interested in is the comparison of a program like Biomorph Land to something like what we experience on Earth. It could very well be a designed program...even though I know that is a far fetched idea, but it does fit the profile of an evolutionary program.Thoughts anyone???

---

"All great truths begin as blasphemies""I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky

Yes, I think we recall you saying that, however, it is not an infinite force so you're just making an assertion about gravity based off of your limited knowledge about physics, hence cavedivers question "What infinite force?". Just because you repeated your original answer, didn't make your answer any clearer. Gravity is the effect caused by mass density, what purpose does it have? Please explain further... This is what you determine to be evidence for design, this is your subjective interpretation from a limited PoV, and not evidence in a scientific sense.As I said in the other thread, your knowledge of physics is lacking a bit. Lets let cavediver school you for a while. I'll hang on the sidelines and watch you work your physics magic.

---

"All great truths begin as blasphemies""I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky