Not by design
The pantheist believes that:
Design1,2 happened3 as adaptation4 (response).5,6,7,8.9
© 2020 by Victor Langheld
1. According to the New Oxford Dictionary the word ‘design’ derives from the late medieval English verb ‘to designate’ and which is derived from the Latin past participle of designare (i.e. designatus) understood to have meant: appoint to a specific position. The NOD defines ‘design’ as 1. A plan or drawing; 2. The art or action of conceiving something; 3. A purpose, plan or intention.
2. Alternately read ‘design’ to mean: identity, i.e. a series of random (or differential) contacts/strikes which when repeated can be identified.
3. Adaptation, interpreted as design, was activated by energy, i.e. by random momentum quanta, viz, turbulence and so on and as response to the need to survive.
4. The NOD defines ‘adaptation’ as: the act, process or procedure of adapting, the latter being derived from the Latin verb adaptare, meaning ad + aptare (from aptus ‘fit’).
5. The NOD defines ‘response’ as: answer, reaction, adapted from the Latin re ‘again’ + spondere ‘to pledge’. What appears as an identifiable reality’s design or architecture happened as actual response (i.e. as adaptation to local conditions) to the virtual goal/necessity of survival.
6. The response (i.e. as a real quantum of identity) is dependent on the responder’s state as ensemble of conditions (i.e. as collective (or universe) of alternate real identity quanta). For response read alternately: affect because it happened at contact, or, as tradition would have it, effect. For activation (by random momentum ≈ energy) read (traditionally): cause. Several ancient Indian physical speculation systems, such as Buddhism and Samkya-Yoga, intuited the above. But they interpreted the cause as ‘ignorance’, Sanskrit: avidyā or, more closer to home, as ‘turbulence’.
7. Every response (as identifiable reality) has 2 components. The first is discrete individual quantum (or digital) contact (or impact, thus instruction) resulting in the experience of momentary isness, i.e. of realness. A series of individual contacts is falsely experienced as being. The second is the response to a quantised series (or, with repetition, as sequence) of such discrete individual contacts and which results, with repetition, in an (analogue) identity. In short, all data (hence identity) transmission is quantised (i.e. digital). The receiving (actually being touched) order quantum responds by compressing and analogising and so identifying the digital contact inputs (i.e. a message) as a whole.
8. Initially, that is to say, in simple order quanta, the adaptation response is automatic (i.e. spontaneous) and blind. Complex order systems, such as a blade of grass or a human, and which have adapted to the survival mode and therefore have learnt, like artificial intelligence or the blind man with his walking stick, to predict outcomes, respond semi-automatically and seemingly partially sighted.
9. In short, the initial (and thereafter recursively and differentially) ordering procedure (and which some choose to name GOD) reveals itself upon quantisation (i.e. as a god) as blind response. The virtual necessity, rather than ‘intention’, as goal, of a quantum of order is survival. The design merely represents the actual means (or pathway) by which the virtual necessity, as goal, was satisfied, i.e. achieved.