Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
9 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What IS evidence of design? (CLOSING STATEMENTS ONLY)
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 31 of 377 (607724)
03-06-2011 12:07 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by Dr Jack
03-06-2011 12:03 PM


Mr Jack writes:
Okay, I'll expand (and refine a little, thinking about it)
An artefact can be identified as designed if:
1. It can be identified as having a purpose or function to a third party
2. That third party influenced the form of the artefact
3. That influence was intentional
So an object that has no obvious function cannot be described as designed - an amorphous lump of rock is not designed, for example (fails on 1). Whereas as elephant poo could be said to have a function to a dung beatle but the dung beatle is incapable of influencing the elephant poo in any way, so elephant poo is not designed (passes 1, fails 2). Criteria 3 is there to root out symbiosis, and co-evolution - aphids did not design Buchnera, Buchnera did not design aphids.
(Oh, and I see I missed the 'y' in party off my previous post, oops)
So consider honeycombs, a termite mound and a birds nest.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Dr Jack, posted 03-06-2011 12:03 PM Dr Jack has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by Dr Jack, posted 03-06-2011 2:26 PM jar has not replied
 Message 44 by nwr, posted 03-06-2011 5:40 PM jar has replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 32 of 377 (607726)
03-06-2011 12:48 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by Dr Jack
03-06-2011 12:03 PM


hummingbirds and flowers
Hi Mr Jack
An artefact can be identified as designed if:
1. It can be identified as having a purpose or function to a third party
2. That third party influenced the form of the artefact
3. That influence was intentional
So an object that has no obvious function cannot be described as designed - an amorphous lump of rock is not designed, for example (fails on 1). Whereas as elephant poo could be said to have a function to a dung beatle but the dung beatle is incapable of influencing the elephant poo in any way, so elephant poo is not designed (passes 1, fails 2). Criteria 3 is there to root out symbiosis, and co-evolution - aphids did not design Buchnera, Buchnera did not design aphids.
But does it rule out co-evolution? Aphids cultivated and domesticated by ants? Hummingbirds and long pistle flowers, the long tongued hawk moth Manduca rustica in Madagascar, with the star orchid that only can be fertilized by that specific moth and the moth has no other need for that long a tongue except to pollinate that flower.
Not an artifact, but certainly a modified for a function tool.
Enjoy
http://www.fs.fed.us/...inator-of-the-month/hawk_moths.shtml

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Dr Jack, posted 03-06-2011 12:03 PM Dr Jack has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by Dr Jack, posted 03-06-2011 2:28 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 33 of 377 (607727)
03-06-2011 12:53 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by fearandloathing
03-06-2011 10:37 AM


Re: Evidence of Design
fearandloathing writes:
So if I understand your line of thought then a mouse has no significant difference in intelligence or ability to reason compared to a chimp or bonobo?
Nothing compared to the gap between mouse and humans.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by fearandloathing, posted 03-06-2011 10:37 AM fearandloathing has not replied

Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.7


Message 34 of 377 (607736)
03-06-2011 2:26 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by jar
03-06-2011 12:07 PM


jar writes:
So consider honeycombs, a termite mound and a birds nest.
Why? I think my definition puts them as designed. Do you not?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by jar, posted 03-06-2011 12:07 PM jar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by fearandloathing, posted 03-06-2011 2:39 PM Dr Jack has replied

Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.7


Message 35 of 377 (607737)
03-06-2011 2:28 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by RAZD
03-06-2011 12:48 PM


Re: hummingbirds and flowers
Can they be said to be intentional?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by RAZD, posted 03-06-2011 12:48 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

fearandloathing
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 990
From: Burlington, NC, USA
Joined: 02-24-2011


Message 36 of 377 (607739)
03-06-2011 2:39 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by Dr Jack
03-06-2011 2:26 PM


honeycombs
I think the honeycomb may be simply the best arrangement to utilize most storage space possible. Its also strong, but I don't feel it it designed by the bee or god. With that line of thought you could argue the beaver-dam and few other things too.
You can wiki honeycomb and follow the links to Archimedes lab and see some interesting stuff and even a way the design could be better in theory but in practice the difference is negligible.
Edited by fearandloathing, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Dr Jack, posted 03-06-2011 2:26 PM Dr Jack has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by Dr Jack, posted 03-06-2011 2:53 PM fearandloathing has replied
 Message 42 by ringo, posted 03-06-2011 4:16 PM fearandloathing has not replied

Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.7


Message 37 of 377 (607741)
03-06-2011 2:53 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by fearandloathing
03-06-2011 2:39 PM


Re: honeycombs
I think bee colonies design their hives. The hexagonal shape itself isn't but the arrangement is varied according to the environment and needs of the colony.
I can't see a sensible reason to think beavers aren't engaged in design.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by fearandloathing, posted 03-06-2011 2:39 PM fearandloathing has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by fearandloathing, posted 03-06-2011 3:04 PM Dr Jack has replied

fearandloathing
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 990
From: Burlington, NC, USA
Joined: 02-24-2011


Message 38 of 377 (607743)
03-06-2011 3:04 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by Dr Jack
03-06-2011 2:53 PM


Re: honeycombs
I guess we would have to agree on what design means to this discussion...wiki wasn't very helpful.. lol.
Maybe someone smarter than I has a definition that would be acceptable?? I shall look a little further.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Dr Jack, posted 03-06-2011 2:53 PM Dr Jack has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by Dr Jack, posted 03-06-2011 3:16 PM fearandloathing has replied

Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.7


Message 39 of 377 (607745)
03-06-2011 3:16 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by fearandloathing
03-06-2011 3:04 PM


Re: honeycombs
I would suggest other peoples definitions are minimally useful here. Perhaps you could pick a suitable case - such as the beaver - and explain why you think it is not design.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by fearandloathing, posted 03-06-2011 3:04 PM fearandloathing has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by fearandloathing, posted 03-06-2011 3:36 PM Dr Jack has not replied
 Message 41 by fearandloathing, posted 03-06-2011 3:51 PM Dr Jack has not replied

fearandloathing
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 990
From: Burlington, NC, USA
Joined: 02-24-2011


Message 40 of 377 (607747)
03-06-2011 3:36 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by Dr Jack
03-06-2011 3:16 PM


Re: honeycombs
LOL...well there are many too choose from. I will put some thought into it. Maybe you see one that you think is more relevant?
I work in construction/maintenance < plumbing , pipefitting ect.., so I am biased. I veiw design as when I walk into a new house...look at prints and then lay-out where stuff goes. I have to design that system to work well and meet code. There are other considerations such as doing it cost effective ie...least number of fittings and pipe. Then there are considerations of ease of use or access for maintainence, and of couse what the customer wants. After all that the end product is my design based on many different reqirements, but rarely do I have to put it in the form of a blueprint.
I am not sure I can say the beaver is not simply working on instinct.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Dr Jack, posted 03-06-2011 3:16 PM Dr Jack has not replied

fearandloathing
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 990
From: Burlington, NC, USA
Joined: 02-24-2011


Message 41 of 377 (607749)
03-06-2011 3:51 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by Dr Jack
03-06-2011 3:16 PM


Re: Beavers as designers
I honestly cant say beavers don't design at this point.
I will say that it is not a design process that uses engineering in a method to get a end result. As a child I built many forts and a tree house using trial and error. I didn't have no understanding of how much load a piece of wood could withstand, but common sense and erring on the side of caution worked well for me then. By some definitions I was still actively designing.
Could the use of tools , in order to complete a design be appropriate?
Edited by fearandloathing, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Dr Jack, posted 03-06-2011 3:16 PM Dr Jack has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by fearandloathing, posted 03-06-2011 5:10 PM fearandloathing has not replied

ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 42 of 377 (607753)
03-06-2011 4:16 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by fearandloathing
03-06-2011 2:39 PM


Re: honeycombs
fearandloathing writes:
I think the honeycomb may be simply the best arrangement to utilize most storage space possible. Its also strong, but I don't feel it it designed by the bee or god.
I agree. Bees are round and they make bee-shaped holes to store their honey in. It just so happens that when you "stack" round holes, you get a honeycomb. I think the honeycomb is more akin to the snowflake than to anything designed.

You can have brevity and clarify, or you can have accuracy and detail, but you can't easily have both. --Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by fearandloathing, posted 03-06-2011 2:39 PM fearandloathing has not replied

fearandloathing
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 990
From: Burlington, NC, USA
Joined: 02-24-2011


Message 43 of 377 (607758)
03-06-2011 5:10 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by fearandloathing
03-06-2011 3:51 PM


Re: Beavers as designers
fearandloathing writes:
I honestly cant say beavers don't design at this point.
I will say that it is not a design process that uses engineering in a method to get a end result. As a child I built many forts and a tree house using trial and error. I didn't have no understanding of how much load a piece of wood could withstand, but common sense and erring on the side of caution worked well for me then. By some definitions I was still actively designing.
Could the use of tools , in order to complete a design be appropriate?
I will answer myself...lol....sign of mental instability or not???
Tool use means nothing. I can design and build a shelter with no tools...sticks vines and leaves maybe...snow cave ect...
Maybe in this case an argument can be made by how the materials are utilized?? Most designs will utilize materials available in an orderly and efficient way as to reduce waste and improve efficiency of said design or ease of constuction...whether it be labor or energy used.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by fearandloathing, posted 03-06-2011 3:51 PM fearandloathing has not replied

nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 44 of 377 (607760)
03-06-2011 5:40 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by jar
03-06-2011 12:07 PM


jar writes:
So consider honeycombs, a termite mound and a birds nest.
I don't have a problem saying that those are designed. But it depends on what is meant by "design." I would consider them ad hoc designs. That is, they are built up, and adjusted as needed, but there is no explicit prior plan or blueprint.
Edited by nwr, : Fix typo (inserted word marked in red)

Jesus was a liberal hippie

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by jar, posted 03-06-2011 12:07 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by jar, posted 03-06-2011 5:52 PM nwr has seen this message but not replied
 Message 46 by fearandloathing, posted 03-06-2011 5:52 PM nwr has replied
 Message 48 by Dr Jack, posted 03-06-2011 6:27 PM nwr has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 45 of 377 (607762)
03-06-2011 5:52 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by nwr
03-06-2011 5:40 PM


nwr writes:
jar writes:
So consider honeycombs, a termite mound and a birds nest.
I don't have a problem saying that those are designed. But it depends on what is meant by "design." I would consider them ad hoc designs. That is, they are built up, and adjusted as needed, but there is explicit prior plan or blueprint.
Can we also see the actual production and producers and then can we infer that like arrowheads, pottery and Stonehenge that ancient examples of honeycombs, termite mounds or nests had similar origins?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by nwr, posted 03-06-2011 5:40 PM nwr has seen this message but not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024