Creation, Design, and Intention
There are two possibilities that I see which primarily determines my view on the first part of this question
. Either there is a God, or some kind of creator, which created the universe and all things that we know of, so everything is either designed, or possibly a side effect of design. The other possibility is that there is either no creator, or there is a god, who did not create the universe, but still exists, so that the universe was not created, but eternal in the way that many gods are perceived, and therefore not consciously designed.
If there is a creator, i.e.; a designer, of the universe, then everything is produced as either by design, or as a side effect of design. This means that production can only be by the will of conscious design, or as a side effect of design. What I mean by a side effect of design, is in the event of a god not being an all knowing creator, as if there is an all knowing creator I believe that this god would know exactly how 'he' started the universe, and exactly how it works, which as its most substantial point would mean that he would know exactly how everything would end up so would not have to interfere or change his mind, and as it pertains here a god would not have any unexpected results; i.e.; no side effects. So if there is a creator and the universe is therefore designed, then conscious design is the only means of creation, again barring or with the exception of side effects.
If the universe was not a product of design, then it means that there can be natural things which were not consciously designed. Examples of this are those such as evolution, adaptation, and mutation. Species advance and evolve by random mutations that help a plant or animal to survive, therefore passing on that trait and further expanding and elaborating the design of a mechanism or various function and purpose. In this way conscious design is still an ability of the conscious mind, but not a requirement for production. As an example of this is, lets say that rock from William Paley's paper on the example of the watch and watchmaker. This rock could easily be said to be a designed product by god, made to be used by humans as a building material, as weapons, and for other uses. Or it could be said that it is merely 'natural', and is there by chance, but is used by humans or whatever else, for its own uses and interpretations as to its meaning and purpose.
In this situation, design, or the appearance of design is not definite evidence of conscious design. The example of something designed to be perfectly natural, and that which is actually natural comes to mind. In the situation of there being a creator something which is produced is designed, and must have been made by conscious design, but in either of these cases it is most likely that you are not going to know which situation you reside in so you cannot be sure in either case whether something is natural, designed to be natural, or is merely designed to be what it is, for purposes you may or may not be able to glean from your interpretations made by analysis and inspection of its function. How I feel about the presence of evidence for conscious design in the world, is again dependant on the above conditions. It is evidence because we do not know if there is a necessity of conscious design in the nature of production, or if it is merely a possibility, so too it may or may not be evidence of a mind behind what we see as designed to attain its apparent purpose and function. For example everything in the world may have been created by god to further the purpose of the existence of humans. Plants may exist so that they may create oxygen for us to breath. Or for all we know, if god wanted to make something material, he would make a material creator of it. For example, god loves watches. Those cheap little digital watches for like two dollars at a gas station, or Rolex's, he doesn't care, he just loves watches, so he makes humans as a tool to make watches and to further this cause he makes things like plants to make oxygen so we can breathe.
My opinion on science addressing these questions, is that it is rather limited in its purpose. Understanding more about how something functions, such as the eye which seems to be a preferred example of Paley, helps you understand the function of a product and possibly interpret more of the designers intent by this, but other than that it is not able to make any contributions towards choosing a specific situation out of the two I established above. As in the example of that which is natural, and that which is perfectly designed to appear natural, science can detect no distinction between the two. Science can tell you how a tree works, but not its purpose for existence. It is how, not why.
Creation, Design, and Intention
By: algavinn
Plymouth Roll In Style uggs norge boots fashion design and unique Design Tips For Desert Landscaping The Finest St. Louis Web Design Company How To Select A Web Designing Company Unique Styles From Belts Designer Tips For Deck Construction Web Design India Make A Style Statement With Lehenga Saree This Eid Decorate your birthday party with birthday banners Best Designers Wearing Are The Only Open Source To Look Elegant Pearl And Leather French Designer Jewelry- The Perfect Piece Of Jewelry The Futuristic Design Of Teknic Jackets