(Been away for a week)
I have spent much of the past several months reading and thinking about design and what it means to design something. Just been too busy to write about it.
Before I get more deeply into it later this week, I just have to share something that recently seeped into my brain.
I have been following the discussions about evolution vs. intelligent design, in part because I have long been interested in the nature and beginning of our universe, the mysteries of the sub-atomic world, quantum physics, and so on.
Initially the concept of intelligent design appealed to me because it satisfied both the scientific and spiritual sides of me. But the other day, it hit me: the term is a redundancy. If anything is designed, from the universe to a blogger's page to a newspaper, it is the result of an intelligence with a plan. Even bad design (and there's w-a-a-a-y too much of that around), is the result of an intelligence with a plan, a blueprint. Randomness can create, but it can't design.
So that's why I can't use the term intelligent design any more. The second word includes the first. The editor in me now cringes.
More design thoughts TK.
3 comments:
I have to disagree with you on one point: designs can emerge from randomness; Rorschach Test images are a good example.
As an evolution proponent, I believe if there's such a thing as an intelligent designer, we are it. Because of our noggins' surplus of gray matter, we're able to notice and ponder nature's designs -- snowflakes and tree leaves could have been formed by the same randomness that creates unique Rorschach images -- and we strive to mimic nature. Thus our attraction to symmetry, balance, Golden Mean, so on. Perhaps this is our psychic link to nature; our design heritage if you will!
But anyway ... shouldn't I be rimming stories instead of waxing philosophy?
Well, maybe I wasn't clear. I think you are mixing up patterns with design. Patterns, such as snowflakes and tree leaves, can certainly come from randomness (or design, obviously). But I still submit that a design involves a plan, an intelligence behind it.
When we see patterns in nature, we sometimes ascribe design to them without knowing whether it is a pattern or a design. I know I am being picky, but I want to be clear about what I mean when I use the word design.
Let me appeal to the editor in you now. Often I read sentences, usually leads, that bury dates.
"Wal-Mart Stores Inc., the nation's largest retailer, Monday asked a court to ... "
"The St. Joe Co. Tuesday announced it would ... "
I hate this with the fire of a thousand suns. I think placing the date immediately following the subject is a speed bump ruining the flow of a good sentence. But some reporters complain that starting or ending a sentence with a date "weakens" it (I will concede that sentences rarely work well with the date at the top, but I have no qualms about putting it in the end).
I try to move the date to the end of the sentence whenever possible. Am I out of line by moving around dates in sentences?
Post a Comment