Why does one deny the DESIGNER ?

Question

Noone can deny the artist of a beautiful painting .
Noone can deny the craftsman( or carpenter) of intellegently& beautifully designed furniture .
There is no problem believing the "unseen designers"
***
Likewise, ,,Is it intelligent to claim
Lets say " a flower " is formed by itself,,by nature , (which is formed by soil,heat,wind,air,..many many " unintelligent" units )
Can an unintelligent thing can form a "well-designed, symetric,beautiful,colourful,smelly being" ????
Or does the DESIGNER uses the NATURE to CREATE beings ?

Answer 1

People want to design there own reality so they dont want a designer.

Answer 2

This is a very old argument, but you may not be a very old person, and perhaps you have not worked on it before.

Nature designs beautifully, doesn't She? There is a wonderful book, called "Patterns in Nature" (I don't know the author, and don't have a copy) which demonstrates amply that the reason we call something beautiful is more related to the natural world than to the artificial world of painters or sculptors. The spirals in the center of a sunflower are caused by the natural packing of the seeds into their most efficient configuration. The color of a rose, so intense and beautiful, is a natural result of the rose's need to attract bees. Much of what you see is actually fluorescence -- in fact, that's where the term originated. The beautiful plumage of a bird is related to its need to attract a mate.

And so it goes. Mother Nature, whether personified and worshiped or simply appreciated as a natural process, is a very good designer because that's where we learned about good design.

Answer 3

Humans design things after nature...but there is no need to assume nature has a creator.

It may appear quite clear to you...but it really is not so obvious an assumption.

In cultures dominated by the ceramic-model of the universe (see Alan Watts), a child may ask its parents, "how was I made". That is how it is in the west. But in the east, it would be unnatural. A child would ask something like, "how was I grown'. That is more of a process model. Darwism is a process model.

Not to say one model or the other is correct, but there is more than one (or two) models of the universe from which to see reality.

~ Eric Putkonen

Answer 4

Uggg.... look... natural processes and manmade things are NOT the same thing. You cannot use a watch, a painting, or anything else to prove your god because they have nothing at all to do with your god.

And I watched the debate too, you know.

The Christians broke the rules the moment they opened their mouths the first time when they brought up the bible after agreeing that they'd deliver scientific proof and leave the bible out of it.

The Atheists were not allowed to speak or fully explain anything about science and scientific concepts because the moderator kept interupting and then moving on to whatever crap the Christians had to say. A moderator is supposed to prevent arguments and give equal time, NOT put in his own biased crap whenever he has a chance.

The debate was totally and utterly worthless because there was no sense of fair play.

Answer 5

If you cannot understand how evolution very very very slowly came up with a flower, then you do not understand it. I find it interesting that this is the best argument that any creationist has ever come up with, and it was Darwin who came up with the solution. The answer is natural selection, my dear boy, natural selection.

PS: was it really necessary to put "designer" in all caps?
----------------------------------
And of course, your argument is it own obstacle. Now you have to explain who designed the designer. This designer would have to be even more complex than its design, so sure it didn't just go poof into existence.

Answer 6

Your problem is that you are apparently unable to think in the abstract and are helplessly trapped in your narrow solipsistic world-view. The only way out of your mental conundrum is through rigorous self-education. I suggest reading any non-fiction (ie, non-religious) texts that hold your interest. Expand your mind through self-education. This is what public libraries are for. Eventually, you will realize that demonstrating your ignorance by publicly proclaiming your blind faith is NOT a virtue.

Answer 7

Let's see, because the artist usually signs his or her name on the artwork some where. You can call up the artist, sometimes even see the art studio.

You can do the same thing with a craftsman, you can look them up and go and see them actually building things.

You can't do that with god. You can't call him up and verify the claim. Your god never signed his name anywhere. How do you know, even if everything was created that it was your god and not Odin?

Answer 8

Poor analogies. You can find and talk with the painter. You can physically see his studio, his tools, you can watch his work in progress. Where are the tours of gods warehouse? There is no god, never has been, never will be. God is merely the creation of man. So the idea that a fictional character created anything is ridiculous.

Answer 9

Does the same artist paint every painting? I think not. Then it would be safe to assume there isn't one 'designer". There must be a multitude of designers. Thank you for introducing me to the joys of polytheism with your astonishing argument.

Answer 10

There have been many paintings that were allegedly painted by Rembrandt. Later we found out he never painted them, but a few other painters who worked with him.

So, in your theory (which is false, because your 'creator' never gets created in your theory), which god was the designer? We can't even connect the right painter to a particular painting, what makes you think we can connect one particular god to creation?

Answer 11

The principles of nature resemble (but are far in advance of) intelligence, because our human intelligence has its source in nature. There is no need for the conception of a creator/designer God. This idea has its source only in materialism, as a reaction to positivism.