Is the natural world designed or non-designed, and how can we tell?

Question

It seems to me that the only reason we can look at a man-made artefact and conclude that it is designed, is that we have natural, non-designed things to compare it to. If we dig up a clay object, and it is shaped in such a way that it can contain a liquid, and it has protruding loops which are convenient to hold on to, and it has been subjected to high temperatures, we can reasonably conclude that it is a man-made pot, because the chance of such a thing occurring naturally, without intelligent design, is pretty small. We are working on the assumption that the natural things we compare this pot to are non-designed, and that's how we can tell the difference.

Similarly if we find a lump of flint with a continuous chipped sharp edge all along one side, making it useful for cutting meat, whilst the other side is smooth and rounded, making it comfortable to hold in a human hand, we can reasonably conclude it was designed.

So, does this show that the natural world is non-designed?

Answer 1

While people are starting to design some fairly complex things, we're orders of magnitude away from designing anything as complex as life, or even non-living complex systems like beaches and lakes and weather systems. When we use design to make things that are fairly complex, the limitations of intelligent design become readily apparent: note the delays in the production of the Airbus 380, or the many flaws in common software.

The natural world is simply far too complex to have been intelligently designed.


Creationist thinking about this is remarkably confused. For example, notice the response above that says that the world was designed because men can't make butterflies. She's apparently thinking that the fact that we can't design the natural world...means that the natural world must have been designed. Where else is the failure of a process taken as evidence that the process works?

The other comment that there "are no straight lines in nature" is almost as odd, though: of course there are. Plenty of 'em, in crystals and sticks and strata and all sorts of places.

Answer 2

you assert: "the only reason we are in a position to seem at a vehicle or a can opener or a 4,000-year-previous clay pot and say with self assurance that it replaced into intelligently designed is that we are in a position to study it with each and every thing in the organic international which replaced into *no longer* intelligently designed, and notice the version." it is one way all of us comprehend that some thing is intelligently designed. yet while theologians say that the universe shows "smart layout," what they often recommend is that the universe proceeds in an orderly or rational way which we known because of the fact we are smart creatures. as an occasion, there are the guidelines of physics (gravity, torque, conservation of rely and means, etc) - which we've discovered because of the fact we are smart creatures. We discovered that the earth revolves around the sunlight in a fastened orbit and so do the different planets. we are in a position to particular astronomical phenomena in complicated mathematical formulation and use them to launch an area orbiter, etc. The universe isn't chaotic - if it have been, then what coverage can we've that the next day the sunlight will upward thrust from the east and set in the west at such and such situations? this is all it is meant by using "smart layout" - that smart creatures like ourselves can comprehend it or perhaps advance upon it.

Answer 3

Lack of evidence of the designer's existence is fairly convincing evidence in and of itself.

As relates to the natural environment, there are no straight lines in nature, so the creator/designer must have not had a straight edge available to him.

And, climactic & geological changes indicate the original design had flaws that are regularly corrected through various means including earthquakes, volcanoes, hurricanes and other events intended to correct a faulty condition.

Summary, there is no evidence of a (competent) designer.

Answer 4

You cannot be conclusive, because we have such limited experience of other planets. (if we are playing the comparison game)

However, I would deduce that if species were 'designed' by an external 'being', why would some be selected for extinction? It does not stand up to scrutiny.

Answer 5

That makes no sense towards the argument. A god that can create matter itself into anything, is judged by what is man-made?
You can tell by logic and a clear understanding of how time exists, you can understand by the fact that a monkey given a pen, would create a flawless essay in as much chance as the universe simply coming to what it is now. And don't forget the Bible's accuracy in historical facts.

Answer 6

the short answer is - the natural world is natural, not artificial.
the long answer is - all religious theories concerning the creation of the world originate in myths, stories told by primitives around the camp fire.
we can tell it by comparing scientific explanations with religious ones and finding the clear superiority of science over religion in explaining nature.

Answer 7

Things adapt in nature to suit their individual needs...Why else would a Venus fly trap need to eat a bug, or even 'know' to for that reason...nothing is designed..Its all adaptations of their environments

Answer 8

Only smurfs believe the earth (or whatever) was designed like a clay pot.

Answer 9

The process of evolution is self-designing. All aspects of life are dedicated to survival purposes. So, it doesnt mean it isnt designed, it means its autonomously designed.

Answer 10

Nature is not designed but it's just cause and effect. That's why it's always changing.