quote:
In the world of software or systems engineering we frequently borrow a concept "...which is suited to a particular purpose..." and adapt it for another purpose. However, the fact that we use it in its original or a modified form does not justify your statement that "... then we do not require any intelligence behind the design."
Indeed, whenever an artifact is used for a purpose other than that of it's original designer, we still benefit from the intelligence of that designer. It saves us time trying to design something that will work as well.
The 'system' in either of these cases is an intelligent design
since the 'new/modified' artifact had a design intent.
What I am talking about is the emergence of a system that
just happens to do something useful -- anything useful in fact.
And in software/systems engineering the concepts are not
'suited to a purpose' they are 'designed for a purpose'.
I am pointing out that intelligence is not a pre-requisite
of design, and so design cannot be used to infer an intelligence
behind the design.
If one wishes to show intelligence then one needs to look
for something else.
quote:
Any algorithm that does "design" has merely been designed by it's creator with some part of the knowledge base (intelligence) of the designer embedded in the algorithm.
Not necessarily.
Evolutionary design algorithms emulate the supposed natural
process of evolution i.e. random change + selection wrt environmental
factors.
There is no knowlegde base, there is a process and an environment.
The results are patentable circuit designs.
In one experiment to create an oscillator, a radio receiver was
generated instead ... because the environment included (accidently)
a radio source emitting at the right frequency.
The design fit the environment, but the circuit was completely
unaticipated by the people who created the design program.
Intelligent Design postulates 'intent', but uses 'design' to
infer it.
This is incorrect.
It assumes that what something does, is what it was intended
to do -- but there is no support for that assumption available.