Dilemma of intelligent design and free will

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bahman
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Bahman

Guest
Lets have definitions first:

A) Design by definition is form in mind to produce something with a specific function, have desired output giving (name removed by moderator)ut.
B) Free will is ability to freely decide after realizing options.

Here is the basic questions:

How something could act freely if it is fully designed?

To me that is logically impossible.

How something could be created without design?

To me that is logically impossible.

Hence the concept of creation is false.
 
Bahman said:
How something could act freely if it is fully designed?
Click to expand...
Why are you changing the terms after you define them? You assert a definition of ‘free will’, but then ask a question about a ‘free act’. :confused:
How something could be created without design?
Click to expand...
To me that is logically impossible.
Click to expand...
Hence the concept of creation is false.
Click to expand...
Maybe I need another cup of coffee, but I’m not seeing how you’re getting from “creation implies design” to “creation is false”…? :confused:
 
not a dilemma for me, ‘to enter heaven, we must be like little children’.
 
Gorgias said:
Why are you changing the terms after you define them? You assert a definition of ‘free will’, but then ask a question about a ‘free act’. :confused:
Click to expand...
What I am trying to show is that there is a conflict between freedom and design.
Gorgias said:
Maybe I need another cup of coffee, but I’m not seeing how you’re getting from “creation implies design” to “creation is false”…? :confused:
Click to expand...
What makes creation unique is the existence of creatures with free will otherwise human can claim that they create creatures, so called machines. The question is whether there exist a design, a bulk of knowledge implanted in creation in which creation work according to it? Yes, there is no free will or there is no design. No, it seems this is the only alternative.
 
Bahman said:
What I am trying to show is that there is a conflict between freedom and design.

What makes creation unique is the existence of creatures with free will otherwise human can claim that they create creatures, so called machines. The question is whether there exist a design, a bulk of knowledge implanted in creation in which creation work according to it? Yes, there is no free will or there is no design. No, it seems this is the only alternative.
Click to expand...
Why can’t free will and freedom be part of the design??? 🤷
 
Jon_S said:
Why can’t free will and freedom be part of the design??? 🤷
Click to expand...
Because, design by definition is a bulk of knowledge that implanted in the designed in order to have desired outcome, which is obviously against the idea of freedom.
 
no, not a conflict, we’re just not as wise as our Lord. yet.
 
Bahman said:
Because, design by definition is a bulk of knowledge that implanted in the designed in order to have desired outcome, which is obviously against the idea of freedom.
Click to expand...
This is a false definition.

I can design a political system in which people are free to pick their lifestyle by way of elections. Are you saying such a design is an illogical possibility?
 
Bahman said:
What I am trying to show is that there is a conflict between freedom and design.
Click to expand...
Yes, but to show that ‘conflict’ – which takes place, in your assertion, with a ‘free act’ – you need to define ‘free act’ (or define ‘free will’ as referring to ‘action’).

Of course, once you do that, I’ll object to your definition. 😉

So, it seems that you have two choices: either you define ‘free will’ and then ignore that definition and make an assertion about a ‘free act’ (which leads me to say “not a valid argument! ‘apples and oranges’!”), or you include ‘act’ in your definition of ‘free will’ (which leads me to say, “poor definition! ‘act’ isn’t part of the definition of ‘will’!”). Your choice… 😉
design by definition is a bulk of knowledge that implanted in the designed in order to have desired outcome, which is obviously against the idea of freedom.
Click to expand...
I disagree with your definition. Here, you haven’t defined ‘design’, you’ve defined ‘programming’. Yes, if a being is ‘programmed’ to have a specific response to a specific stimulus, then you’re right: no free will. However, just as in the case of ‘free will’, you’ve defined one thing, and are attempting to use it in an application of something else entirely. That dog just don’t hunt… 🤷
 
Perhaps you should use an actual definition of “design”

de·sign
dəˈzīn/Submit
noun
1.
a plan or drawing produced to show the look and function or workings of a building, garment, or other object before it is built or made.
“he has just unveiled his design for the new museum”
synonyms: plan, blueprint, drawing, sketch, outline, map, plot, diagram, draft, representation, scheme, model
“a design for the offices”
the art or action of conceiving of and producing a plan or drawing.
“good design can help the reader understand complicated information”
an arrangement of lines or shapes created to form a pattern or decoration.
“pottery with a lovely blue and white design”
synonyms: pattern, motif, device; More
**
2.
purpose, planning, or intention that exists or is thought to exist behind an action, fact, or material object.
“the appearance of design in the universe” **

synonyms: intention, aim, purpose, plan, intent, objective, object, goal, end, target; More

Notice none of the synonyms nor the definition indicate any absence of freedom, in fact words like “aim” “intent” “goal” etc… Indicate quite the opposite.
 
Bahman said:
Lets have definitions first:

A) Design by definition is form in mind to produce something with a specific function, have desired output giving (name removed by moderator)ut.
B) Free will is ability to freely decide after realizing options.

Here is the basic questions:

How something could act freely if it is fully designed?

To me that is logically impossible.
Click to expand...
Let’s say I work for Ford Motors and design a car. Do I control where you drive it?

Simple as that.
 
Gorgias said:
Yes, but to show that ‘conflict’ – which takes place, in your assertion, with a ‘free act’ – you need to define ‘free act’ (or define ‘free will’ as referring to ‘action’).

Of course, once you do that, I’ll object to your definition. 😉

So, it seems that you have two choices: either you define ‘free will’ and then ignore that definition and make an assertion about a ‘free act’ (which leads me to say “not a valid argument! ‘apples and oranges’!”), or you include ‘act’ in your definition of ‘free will’ (which leads me to say, “poor definition! ‘act’ isn’t part of the definition of ‘will’!”). Your choice… 😉
Click to expand...
Ok, here is a new version:

A) Design by definition is form in mind to produce something with a specific function, have desired output giving (name removed by moderator)ut.
B) Free will is ability to freely decide after realizing options.

Here is the basic questions:

How something could have free will if it is fully designed?

To me that is logically impossible.

How something could be created without design?

To me that is logically impossible.

Hence the concept of creation is false.
Gorgias said:
I disagree with your definition. Here, you haven’t defined ‘design’, you’ve defined ‘programming’. Yes, if a being is ‘programmed’ to have a specific response to a specific stimulus, then you’re right: no free will. However, just as in the case of ‘free will’, you’ve defined one thing, and are attempting to use it in an application of something else entirely. That dog just don’t hunt… 🤷
Click to expand...
How do you define design?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top