Monday, 21 January 2013

Qualifying Design and therefore a Designer

"How do we qualify, or find out, whether something is designed, if we do not have a designer present, or we don't know if we can infer a designer for sure?"

I believe the only sound logical way to answer that question with 100% certainty, not 99%, is to look at GENUINE designs, that we KNOW to have designers, and see what qualifies them as being designed by designers in the first place.  If we know that then we will know whether something is designed if it has the same qualities.

There are 3 fundamental qualifiers that we observe from human designs or technology;

1. Construction from materials of which such natural properties never contain.
2. Contingency-plans.
3. Function leading to specific or even obscure purpose.

So now let's look at KNOWN designs. (Remember, there is no argument as to whether there are designers.)

A car. It is constructed from metals and plastics and various materials. Such natural properties do not naturally lead to such specific constructions. Metal of itself, will never arrange itself into complex and specific shapes such as a chassis or a carburetor.

A car has windscreen wipers. This is a contingency plan. It took a designer to THINK with foresight, in order to FORESEE that when it rains, the driver of the car will not be able to continue to drive. Of course, a car, or any known designed-thing is full of such contingencies.

And finally, a car is constructed to drive, and have a driver, to get a person from one place to another. This is it's function leading to it's ultimate and specific purpose. That is WHY it has an engine and wheels, etc, in order to roll on roads. That ultimate purpose is obscure, because if a person from the 15th century saw a car they would perhaps not be able to establish the purpose of the thing or how it functioned.

CONCLUSION: This is how we know something is designed by designers, from looking at things we know to be CERTAINLY designed.

My next question is; "How do we determine between something that is designed by a designer, and something that only APPEARS to be designed? An appearance of design."

I believe the reasonable answer is that something that only appears to be something, will, at some level, FAIL to qualify as the thing it claims to be, such as the example of the robots that are claimed to be sentient or human. After half an hour people were asked if they were communicating with a real person. The vote was unanimous - nobody believed they were communicating with a real person.

My final question is this; "Are organisms designed, or do they have an appearance of design only given by evolution?"

Organisms are constructed from material that doesn't ordinarily consruct itself.(1) Certain elements have not been known to ever arrange themselves into complex structures such as those found in a living cell such as amino acids.  Stick a dead frog in a blender and wait forever, the natural properties in that mixture is everything that makes a frog, but a frog will never be made because those natural properties simply don't create living cells, like metal does not naturally construct itself into a car chassis.

Secondly, organisms have contingencies.(2) When we cut ourselves, our blood clots, and our wounds heal; the cascade. We have eye lids to blink, and stop foreign objects getting in etc.. Every organism has  a whole host of contingency plans just like with known designs otherwise there would not be complete and viable systems in place. All organisms ever known to exist were viable, so they had a whole host of contingency plans, otherwise they simply wouldn't work. Let's not be vague, the facts show organisms have PLANS. What plans, specifically? Only intelligence!

Lastly, all organisms have functions that lead to ultimate or even obscure purpose. We have legs in order to walk, fish have fins and gills in order to swim, birds have wings in order to fly. Function = purpose. Wheels to a car are as legs to a person. Windscreen wipers to a car are as eye lids to a person. etc...


Organisms qualify as being designed on all three fundamental levels by looking at what makes something we know to be designed, designed. Logically, the requirements for a designer have been demonstrated.

1. Foresight for contingency plans
2. Ability to construct that which does not construct itself.
3. Ideas and plans for specific design goals such as flight, aerodynamics as an example.

Final conclusion: Evolution does not have the ability to design life. Evolution is an inadequate solution. If you believe organisms designed themselves by evolution, logically you MUST also reason that human technology did not have a designer. If you argue one, you must argue the other, as they both qualify as the same, in that they are both designed.


  1. Hi Mike,
    Just want to let you know I left a message for you at EvC in case you aren't checking in there much these days.

    I think your points here are good but I'd have to spend more time than I have these days to really get into them.


    1. Thanks Faith/Connie, sorry, I haven't checked any messages, only just noticed your response, glad you can find something in what I have written, and I will check your blog.