Philosophy Now Forum

SpheresOfBalance wrote:

HexHammer wrote:

Hjarloprillar wrote:Design. Evolution.

Design would suggest "Intelligent Design", it seems you are not really aware of what you are saying, but spew your usual random nonsens.

Not at all, a star is designed to burn hydrogen, through fusion yielding heavier elements, this design does not necessarily indicate an intelligent being, but it may. By design, could indicate the nature of the universe. As in, 'the design of the universe, was that of the big bang.'

I find the following definitions, though far down the list, allows for such usage.

11. the combination of details or features of a picture, building, etc.; the pattern or motif of artistic work: the design on a bracelet.

17. adaptation of means to a preconceived end.

Is there not a design to matter? Are not certain constituents required? Can it exist any other way, if so then why is there antimatter? Is it because it's design is the opposite?

And here, from a thesaurus:
Arrangement: Something that has been ordered; alignment; array; classification; combination; composition; design; display; disposition; distribution; form; grouping; lineup; method; ordering; organization; pattern; pecking order; ranging; rank; sequence; setup; structure; system.

SoB ..LOL?

Hjarloprillar wrote:Design. Evolution.

HexHammer wrote:

SpheresOfBalance wrote:

HexHammer wrote:Design would suggest "Intelligent Design", it seems you are not really aware of what you are saying, but spew your usual random nonsens.

Not at all, a star is designed to burn hydrogen, through fusion yielding heavier elements, this design does not necessarily indicate an intelligent being, but it may. By design, could indicate the nature of the universe. As in, 'the design of the universe, was that of the big bang.'

I find the following definitions, though far down the list, allows for such usage.

11. the combination of details or features of a picture, building, etc.; the pattern or motif of artistic work: the design on a bracelet.

17. adaptation of means to a preconceived end.

Is there not a design to matter? Are not certain constituents required? Can it exist any other way, if so then why is there antimatter? Is it because it's design is the opposite?

And here, from a thesaurus:
Arrangement: Something that has been ordered; alignment; array; classification; combination; composition; design; display; disposition; distribution; form; grouping; lineup; method; ordering; organization; pattern; pecking order; ranging; rank; sequence; setup; structure; system.

SoB ..LOL?

If you wish. But first, two must agree upon terms, so they can be reasonably sure, they're talking about the same fruit.

Have you ever looked up and found a 'design' in the clouds, or maybe the stars, where it could be said that they had a 'form,' 'grouping,' or pattern? ever heard of a DNA sequence? Or maybe a star 'system?'

SpheresOfBalance wrote:Not at all, a star is designed to burn hydrogen, through fusion yielding heavier elements, this design does not necessarily indicate an intelligent being, but it may. By design, could indicate the nature of the universe. As in, 'the design of the universe, was that of the big bang.'

I find the following definitions, though far down the list, allows for such usage.

11. the combination of details or features of a picture, building, etc.; the pattern or motif of artistic work: the design on a bracelet.

17. adaptation of means to a preconceived end.

Is there not a design to matter? Are not certain constituents required? Can it exist any other way, if so then why is there antimatter? Is it because it's design is the opposite?

And here, from a thesaurus:
Arrangement: Something that has been ordered; alignment; array; classification; combination; composition; design; display; disposition; distribution; form; grouping; lineup; method; ordering; organization; pattern; pecking order; ranging; rank; sequence; setup; structure; system.

Ok let me try again, this is completely incoherent and unrelating babble, shoehorend into context which it blatantly doesn't fit.

This is something a small child could have made up, not some adult.

HexHammer wrote:

SpheresOfBalance wrote:Not at all, a star is designed to burn hydrogen, through fusion yielding heavier elements, this design does not necessarily indicate an intelligent being, but it may. By design, could indicate the nature of the universe. As in, 'the design of the universe, was that of the big bang.'

I find the following definitions, though far down the list, allows for such usage.

11. the combination of details or features of a picture, building, etc.; the pattern or motif of artistic work: the design on a bracelet.

17. adaptation of means to a preconceived end.

Is there not a design to matter? Are not certain constituents required? Can it exist any other way, if so then why is there antimatter? Is it because it's design is the opposite?

And here, from a thesaurus:
Arrangement: Something that has been ordered; alignment; array; classification; combination; composition; design; display; disposition; distribution; form; grouping; lineup; method; ordering; organization; pattern; pecking order; ranging; rank; sequence; setup; structure; system.

Ok let me try again, this is completely incoherent and unrelating babble, shoehorend into context which it blatantly doesn't fit.

This is something a small child could have made up, not some adult.

Do you feel better now? Have you used your hammer? Bang, bang Maxwells silver hammer came down upon his head; bang bang Maxwell's silver hammer made sure that he was ....! Sorry, what was your real name again, I know it's not Maxwell. Look at my edits above to reconsider, that is if you be educated. A design can be invented or discovered, though it takes a human to see either, at least if they are to report it. We're talking about an arrangement here, a peculiar pattern or design.

SpheresOfBalance wrote:Look at my edits above to reconsider, that is if you be educated. A design can be invented or discovered, though it takes a human to see either, at least if they are to report it. We're talking about an arrangement here, a peculiar pattern or design.

Dude, you don't have the slightest clue what I am talking about.

It was "Intelligent Design" a concept invented by christians, it's creationism in disguise thus it has nothing to do with your long posts.

HexHammer wrote:

SpheresOfBalance wrote:Look at my edits above to reconsider, that is if you be educated. A design can be invented or discovered, though it takes a human to see either, at least if they are to report it. We're talking about an arrangement here, a peculiar pattern or design.

Dude, you don't have the slightest clue what I am talking about.

It was "Intelligent Design" a concept invented by christians, it's creationism in disguise thus it has nothing to do with your long posts.

I'm afraid it's you that have lost track of the conversation, AND I QUOTE:

HexHammer wrote:Design would suggest "Intelligent Design", it seems you are not really aware of what you are saying, but spew your usual random nonsens.

This you said in response to Prill!

And my response to you has been: No not necessarily, for all the reasons I've just outlined.

Do you remember now or are you still lost? It would seem that you've accidentally hit yourself in the head with your hammer, or how else would you explain your memory gap?.

SpheresOfBalance wrote:And my response to you has been: No not necessarily, for all the reasons I've just outlined.

Do you remember now or are you still lost? It would seem that you've accidentally hit yourself in the head with your hammer, or how else would you explain your memory gap?.

I wouldn't hire you for a simple mail correspodence with kids, you fail utterly!

Hjarloprillar wrote:

HexHammer wrote:

Hjarloprillar wrote:Design. Evolution.

Design would suggest "Intelligent Design", it seems you are not really aware of what you are saying, but spew your usual random nonsens.

Religion is about a god.
There are many gods.

The gods of hindu have what to do with monothism of west?
What has BAAL to do with christ?
descriptions of god are not god.

god as designer. seems more valid than the offal you offer

my random noscience applies

Hjarloprillar doesn't refude that I'm accuseing him of babbeling of Intelligent Design, but he actually confirms it, thus you are wrong, utterly wrong ..as usual.

HexHammer wrote:

SpheresOfBalance wrote:And my response to you has been: No not necessarily, for all the reasons I've just outlined.

Do you remember now or are you still lost? It would seem that you've accidentally hit yourself in the head with your hammer, or how else would you explain your memory gap?.

I wouldn't hire you for a simple mail correspodence with kids, you fail utterly!

Hjarloprillar wrote:Design. Evolution.

Hjarloprillar wrote:

HexHammer wrote:Design would suggest "Intelligent Design", it seems you are not really aware of what you are saying, but spew your usual random nonsens.

Religion is about a god.
There are many gods.

The gods of hindu have what to do with monothism of west?
What has BAAL to do with christ?
descriptions of god are not god.

god as designer. seems more valid than the offal you offer

my random noscience applies

Hjarloprillar doesn't refude that I'm accuseing him of babbeling of Intelligent Design, but he actually confirms it, thus you are wrong, utterly wrong ..as usual.

Not wrong at all. My argument was that you were presumptuous, that your initial words to Prill on this matter, did not necessarily follow. That your assessment was indeed premature, for you to come out so forcefully, as if you could know how he used the word 'design.' The word design, absolutely does not ONLY indicate an, 'of intelligent' origin concept. Contextually, in his original, it could have been viewed as I have outlined. My point is that you are far too ready to smack people with your imaginary HexHammer, and that a wiser version of you would slow down and ensure you know in which context one means something before pulling out your weapon of imaginary mass destruction. Such that it matters not what Prill meant, as my comment was for you, not prill.

SpheresOfBalance wrote:Not wrong at all. My argument was that you were presumptuous, that your initial words to Prill on this matter, did not necessarily follow. That your assessment was indeed premature, for you to come out so forcefully, as if you could know how he used the word 'design.' The word design, absolutely does not ONLY indicate an, 'of intelligent' origin concept. Contextually, in his original, it could have been viewed as I have outlined. My point is that you are far too ready to smack people with your imaginary HexHammer, and that a wiser version of you would slow down and ensure you know in which context one means something before pulling out your weapon of imaginary mass destruction. Such that it matters not what Prill meant, as my comment was for you, not prill.

I just proved you wrong, and still you babble about how you wasn't ...what kind of job does one such as you have?

HexHammer wrote:

SpheresOfBalance wrote:Not wrong at all. My argument was that you were presumptuous, that your initial words to Prill on this matter, did not necessarily follow. That your assessment was indeed premature, for you to come out so forcefully, as if you could know how he used the word 'design.' The word design, absolutely does not ONLY indicate an, 'of intelligent' origin concept. Contextually, in his original, it could have been viewed as I have outlined. My point is that you are far too ready to smack people with your imaginary HexHammer, and that a wiser version of you would slow down and ensure you know in which context one means something before pulling out your weapon of imaginary mass destruction. Such that it matters not what Prill meant, as my comment was for you, not prill.

I just proved you wrong, and still you babble about how you wasn't ...what kind of job does one such as you have?

You've only proven me wrong in your own mind, which is to be expected, especially of one that see's themselves as a HexHammer.

A persons job speaks nothing, necessarily, of their minds capabilities. How about IQ, does that say anything?
On a non standard, but accepted test, where 120 was average and 160 was genius, I scored a 146, and was likened to a "Visionary Philosopher," due to the specific questions I got correct.
On a standard test where 100 was average and 140 was genius, I scored 126.
So according to the tests, I'm 26 points above average, while being 14 points below genius. The mid point between average and genius being 20.5 points. But does this really indicate my capabilities? The tests were taken quite some time ago, but I'm not so sure that they actually indicated anything meaningful, then, now, or that they ever will.

SpheresOfBalance

Yes, that might be, but there's such concepts like "rain man" people who excell in certain areas of intellect, but totally fails at most others, aka idiot savants.

HexHammer wrote:SpheresOfBalance

Yes, that might be, but there's such concepts like "rain man" people who excell in certain areas of intellect, but totally fails at most others, aka idiot savants.

Don't worry about it, in my eyes you'll always be just as equal as all the rest, myself included. I only see differences between us all, which depends wholly upon an ever endless palette of unique experience. This is no contest of wit, rather a discovery experience, as we all put our minds together to unravel the mysteries of the universe.

jackles wrote:Is time a principle of uncertainty then

Jackles

As in Q indeterminacy?

no

HexHammer wrote:

SpheresOfBalance wrote:Look at my edits above to reconsider, that is if you be educated. A design can be invented or discovered, though it takes a human to see either, at least if they are to report it. We're talking about an arrangement here, a peculiar pattern or design.

Dude, you don't have the slightest clue what I am talking about.

It was "Intelligent Design" a concept invented by Christians, it's creationism in disguise thus it has nothing to do with your long posts.

Hx

False
Creationism is ,'god made what we exist in' at a point that effectively starts this universe.
Referring [from] a book called bible.

I suggest evolution of biological and systems pertaining to the greater cosmos.
IS 'a very slow' creation [to us]

The "Slow creation"
confuses many of religion who want 'point miracles'.

THE miracle. Occurred at bang with infusion of LAW.
Where is inverse square law or planks constant. Where is SoL and how is it enforced.

Humans 'know so very little'.

Prill [AKA blackadder the 5th]

Hjarloprillar wrote:False
Creationism is ,'god made what we exist in' at a point that effectively starts this universe.
Referring [from] a book called bible.

I suggest evolution of biological and systems pertaining to the greater cosmos.
IS 'a very slow' creation [to us]

The "Slow creation"
confuses many of religion who want 'point miracles'.

THE miracle. Occurred at bang with infusion of LAW.
Where is inverse square law or planks constant. Where is SoL and how is it enforced.

Humans 'know so very little'.

Prill [AKA blackadder the 5th]

You say random things that isn't really for or against what I say, yet you say I'm wrong, please try to specify and this time without sounding like you just woke from a party lasting 2 days.