"You find a watch in the meadow..."?

Question

"You find a painting in the woods..."
"You find a car in the desert..."

These analogies almost always place an obviously designed object in a natural setting. Is this admitting that nature is not obviously designed?

((These are versions of Paley's argument from design))

Answer 1

I rather like this. But I think the problem with it is that each of these things is something made by people, in a place where people aren't. If some God really did make the universe, his creations would be quite different from people's creations.

Answer 2

The argument is being made by someone who sees nature as designed, for someone who doesn't. It's not admitting that the person making the statement doesn't see 'design', but rather the person making the statement recognizes someone else as not being able to see the design.

There is common functional complexity found in nature, and with a watch, and Paley infers an intelligent designer.

Not an uncommon tool in making a philosophical argument.

Answer 3

I have often wondered about that. You never get the "You find a leaf on a tree" "a shell on the beach" "sand in desert" analogies for creation.

Still, the watch in the meadow is much better than the "well made banana" argument.

Answer 4

Actually, you are right. Such an argument would indeed limp by saying that nature is not obviously designed.

That's why I don't particularly subscribe to such forced arguments that try to prove God's existence.

Looking at nature itself, and man in nature, one can not help but wonder. Even looking at the intricacies of nature that science is discovering makes one wonder.

In a universe prone to entropy and to things returning to a simple state, we find zones of organization and complexity. And these things are living. This doesn't prove that God exists, but it does make one wonder.

Answer 5

I don't think so.

I can see how & why it COULDN'T be designed, but my logic seems to lean more to the fact that Natural Selection, Evolution, etc, is all part of the plan. I believe the divine set in the process of Evolution and Natural Selection..

I mean, why not?

I do realize I could be wrong, and that we could just be here by mere chance, but my logic (again) says that life is too beautiful and too short to just be considered MEANINGLESS, other than to survive like Richard Dawkins has stated many times.

Divine or no Divine, life is still beautiful, and it still means SOMETHING..

Answer 6

A colony of bees builds a bee hive, and that's considered nature. A bird builds a nest, and that's considered nature. "Nature" is just a word given by man to something that he did not create. Not to something that was not designed.

Answer 7

Well to me, that would be more an inanimate object in the midst of a living breathing system.

Answer 8

You have a point that people who blindly repeat the ridiculous watch tale miss. I suppose you will get many angry answers for that. My sister insults me if I say such things to her.

Answer 9

Elegantly done, eleventy. =0)

Answer 10

*bows his head in humble admiration*

I had never considered it in quite that light. My weeks of waiting for a new insight are paid off. Thank you.