Design

[buffalo]

Always? When was the last time you looked for the cause of God? You might also have a look at parts of quantum mechanics where “cause” is somewhat fuzzy. As with a lot of QM, macroscopic concepts do not always translate well to the area of QM.

rossum

Yes, I am aware of the QM theories. I am not convinced of the claims of particles popping into existence without cause.

 

[buffalo]

Then design is not a very useful concept. It becomes a mere synonym of “exists”. “X exists” is synonymous with “X is designed”.

rossum

Reality = design?

Design is useful. Purpose is really useful.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Then design is not a very useful concept. It becomes a mere synonym of “exists”. “X exists” is synonymous with “X is designed”.

rossum

You need to rethink that!

The words “exist” and “design” are not the same and they are clearly “designed” to serve different purposes…

 

[rossum]

As I understand in Nirvana you have no sense of self.

You have lost the illusion of self/soul that many people have.

rossum

 

[rossum]

Reality = design?

If God created the universe then everything in the universe is designed. Obviously.

Purpose is really useful.

Purpose is a contingent thing, not a part of the object itself but attached to it by different people.

For a factory worker the purpose of the hammer is to earn money by making the hammer.

For the factory owner the purpose of the hammer is to make a profit by selling it.

The hardware shop owner has the same purpose, to make a profit from selling the hammer.

The person who buys the hammer has the purpose to hammer in nails.

It is the same hammer. What is the “purpose” of the hammer? The various purposes are not intrinsic to the hammer, but are assigned to the hammer by different people. It is an error to reify purpose since is is a highly variable and contingent entity. To a murderer the purpose of a hammer might be to kill people.

rossum

 

[buffalo]

You have lost the illusion of self/soul that many people have.

rossum

A null condition?

 

[buffalo]

If God created the universe then everything in the universe is designed. Obviously.

Purpose is a contingent thing, not a part of the object itself but attached to it by different people.

For a factory worker the purpose of the hammer is to earn money by making the hammer.

For the factory owner the purpose of the hammer is to make a profit by selling it.

The hardware shop owner has the same purpose, to make a profit from selling the hammer.

The person who buys the hammer has the purpose to hammer in nails.

It is the same hammer. What is the “purpose” of the hammer? The various purposes are not intrinsic to the hammer, but are assigned to the hammer by different people. It is an error to reify purpose since is is a highly variable and contingent entity. To a murderer the purpose of a hammer might be to kill people.

rossum

The original designer had a specific use for the hammer. Others expanded its use.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

You have lost the illusion of self/soul that many people have.

rossum

And if “soul” is an illusion, all the more reason to conclude that Buddhism is materialistic and atheistic.

 

[tonyrey]

There is an element of Chance with the framework of Design.

Non sequitur. The universe as a whole ** is **designed even though some events are not intended. No one believes cars are not designed because they kill people! That is the price we pay for living in a physical world. An accident-free planet is a fantasy.

The element of free will also leads to unintended consequences.

Then the designer is not omniscient, because for an omniscient designer all consequences are intended.

Another non sequitur. Car manufacturers **know **some of their cars will have accidents yet their cars are still designed.

It seems to me that you are getting into some deep theological waters here. If God is creator/designer of all, then there can be no undesigned elements in creation. If you assert the presence of undesigned elements, then those undesigned elements were not created/designed by God.

Your argument implies that an Omnipotent Creator cannot create a universe with an element of chance within the framework of Design! Please explain why it is impossible when computer programmers do precisely that. Do they have more power than God? In their case it is gratuitous, of course, but the universe is immensely more complex than anything they design. The onus is on you to describe a feasible universe in which there are no unfortunate coincidences…

 

[Bradski]

Your argument implies that an Omnipotent Creator cannot create a universe with an element of chance within the framework of Design! Please explain why it is impossible when computer programmers do precisely that. Do they have more power than God? In their case it is gratuitous, of course, but the universe is immensely more complex than anything they design. The onus is on you to describe a feasible universe in which there are no unfortunate coincidences…

B: I’ve designed robot that will help us in all sorts of ways. The programming was incredibly complex.
T: Is is safe?
B: Well, kind of…there will be some times when something unfortunate happens.
T: Like what?
B: Ummm…it seems like it will kill you next Tuesday.

You’re saying that’s God. He designs something which will have, as you put it, unfortunate coincidences. But He knows exactly how it will turn out. If I design something that will definately kill you next Tuesday, then I can’t claim it was an unfortunate and unforeseen occurence. It is a direct and foreseeable result of the design process itself.

Now either God knows what is going to happen and therefore is responsible for it when He designed the whole shebang, or He doesn’t.

I can’t see God watching something unfold and thinking: ‘Hell, I din’t see that coming’.

You can’t have it both ways, old boy. It’s all designed by God with full and complete knowledge of literally eveything that is going to happen (the very definition of omniscient), or it isn’t.

 

[buffalo]

B: I’ve designed robot that will help us in all sorts of ways. The programming was incredibly complex.
T: Is is safe?
B: Well, kind of…there will be some times when something unfortunate happens.
T: Like what?
B: Ummm…it seems like it will kill you next Tuesday.

You’re saying that’s God. He designs something which will have, as you put it, unfortunate coincidences. But He knows exactly how it will turn out. If I design something that will definately kill you next Tuesday, then I can’t claim it was an unfortunate and unforeseen occurence. It is a direct and foreseeable result of the design process itself.

Now either God knows what is going to happen and therefore is responsible for it when He designed the whole shebang, or He doesn’t.

I can’t see God watching something unfold and thinking: ‘Hell, I din’t see that coming’.

You can’t have it both ways, old boy. It’s all designed by God with full and complete knowledge of literally eveything that is going to happen (the very definition of omniscient), or it isn’t.

Designed with free will. God is out of time and sees it all at once.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Non sequitur. The universe as a whole ** is **designed even though some events are not intended. No one believes cars are not designed because they kill people! That is the price we pay for living in a physical world. An accident-free planet is a fantasy.

The events that are not intended are allowed as part of the design. God intends for us to be free. He intends us to be happy, but he allows us to be miserable if that is our design rather than his.

God could intervene as he likes to alter the course of history. He has done this many times. But he also has refrained from doing this many times on the principle that actions have consequences.

God set up the universe in such a way that laws exist, and these laws were planned in such a way that we would sooner or later exist. Humankind is not accidental, but rather inevitable.

If God did not create the laws as we know them, we would not exist. Even chance would not allows us to exist.

 

[Bradski]

Designed with free will. God is out of time and sees it all at once.

Well, yeah. My robot was programmd to have free will as well. But I knew it was going to kill Tony. I mean, how can I be held responsible, creating something I knew was going to go on a murderous rampage?

Let’s say someone is selling a gun. A guy turns up to buy it and the seller has a sudden flash of omnisience. He sees that after he buys it, he goes to your place and shoots your wife.

You speak to the seller later. You tell him not to blame himself. No-one could see what was going to happen.

‘Oh no,’ he says. ‘I knew exactly what was going to happen’.

What are you going to tell him now?

 

[Bradski]

God could intervene as he likes to alter the course of history. He has done this many times. But he also has refrained from doing this many times on the principle that actions have consequences.

And he told you this over a couple of beers one night. I have to assume that because, gee, it sounds exactly like you are just making stuff up.

 

[buffalo]

Well, yeah. My robot was programmd to have free will as well. But I knew it was going to kill Tony. I mean, how can I be held responsible, creating something I knew was going to go on a murderous rampage?

Let’s say someone is selling a gun. A guy turns up to buy it and the seller has a sudden flash of omnisience. He sees that after he buys it, he goes to your place and shoots your wife.

You speak to the seller later. You tell him not to blame himself. No-one could see what was going to happen.

‘Oh no,’ he says. ‘I knew exactly what was going to happen’.

What are you going to tell him now?

Restricted free will is not free will.

 

[Bradski]

Restricted free will is not free will.

But you haven’t answered the question. Is the gun seller in any way responsible, knowing with certainty what was going to happen?

 

[Charlemagne_III]

And he told you this over a couple of beers one night. I have to assume that because, gee, it sounds exactly like you are just making stuff up.

A couple of talks with God helps us to figure out what God is thinking.

Whereas a couple of beers with the devil might get you making stuff up. .

 

[buffalo]

But you haven’t answered the question. Is the gun seller in any way responsible, knowing with certainty what was going to happen?

The guy’s flash might be wrong. He is not God so he cannot know with certainty. The gun seller know full well in his business there is a possibility that someone will use a gun he sells for nefarious purposes. So he bears some responsibility for being in the business. A farmer knows that someone will die from the pesticide he uses. We could go on and on.

This goes back to the is God moral argument.

I know my child who is taught not to do something will. I can predict it. Yet he has to learn himself. When he is very young I can physically restrain him. When he gets older my influence wanes. I cannot live his life for him. God, our Father, sees this too.

 

[rossum]

And if “soul” is an illusion, all the more reason to conclude that Buddhism is materialistic and atheistic.

No. Buddhism is tens of thousands of gods further from atheism than Christianity. You are one God away from atheism; I am a lot further:

Sakra, the ruler of the celestials, with twenty thousand gods, his followers, such as the god Chandra (the Moon), the god Surya (the Sun), the god Samantagandha (the Wind), the god Ratnaprabha, the god Avabhasaprabha, and others; further, the four great rulers of the cardinal points with thirty thousand gods in their train, viz. the great ruler Virudhaka, the great ruler Virupaksha, the great ruler Dhritarashtra, and the great ruler Vaisravana; the god Ishvara and the god Maheshvara, each followed by thirty thousand gods; further, Brahma Sahdmpati and his twelve thousand followers, the Brahmakayika gods, amongst whom Brahma Sikhin and Brahma Gyotishprabha, with the other twelve thousand Brahmakayika gods.

– Saddharmapundarika sutra, Chapter One

rossum

 

[rossum]

Non sequitur. The universe as a whole ** is **designed even though some events are not intended.

You contradict yourself here. Unintended events are not designed, by definition. Design has intended results; unintended events are not designed.

Your argument implies that an Omnipotent Creator cannot create a universe with an element of chance within the framework of Design!

An omniscient Creator already knows the outcome of all “chance” events in advance. Hence, to that creator, there is no chance at all. All outcomes are known in advance. It is only a non-omniscient designer that can incorporate chance into a design.

Please explain why it is impossible when computer programmers do precisely that. Do they have more power than God?

God can never learn anything new – He already knows everything. A computer programmer can learn new things because she does not already know everything. There are things an omnimax being cannot do, that humans can, like telling a lie.

The onus is on you to describe a feasible universe in which there are no unfortunate coincidences…

With an omnimax designer/creator there are no unforeseen coincidences. Everything that happens is foreseen. The issue is not the size or complexity of the universe, it is the properties of the designer.

rossum