The Design Argument, discussion help

Design Discussion  The Design Argument can be simple stated as a belief that nothing occurs, or has occurred, spontaneously in nature. That is to say that everything that is n earth, or has ever been on earth, was "designed" and out where it is found purposely by an all powerful being.It is easy to find arguments for and against design. Some of these arguments can almost be used on both sides. With most of my Biology background being in Anatomy, I like to look at our own bodies and how they can be used in this argument. Our bodies would make for a great argument on the side of design. How would it be possible to think that all of our systems, muscular, skeletal, nervous, respiratory, vascular, endocrine...etc, work so harmoniously together if not by design? It is almost easy to believe that something, or someone, with far superior intelligence created these systems and organized them so perfectly. What is interesting to me is that you can also use our bodies as an argument against design. The fact that different races and ethnicities in differing parts of the world have "adapted" to their surroundings time and time again. Different skin pigments, differences in average stature, differences in typical amounts of body hair are just a few examples of these adaptations. Another example is how there are different diseases processes prevalent in certain areas of the same country. An example of this is Multiple Sclerosis. MS is 5 times more common in temperate regions than in places near the equator. Why? One could very easily argue environmental factors. If we are all "created" the same why would it matter where we live? Seems like a valid argument against design to me.The idea of design has been around since Aristotle but was the overwhelming belief in the 1800's. Design had such a powerful following during this time due to the popularity of Christianity as well as it being around the time William Paley reinforced the ideas in Natural Theology. Natural Theology not only helped to strengthen the belief in Christianity, by reinforcing the idea that the intricacies in nature had to come about by design because they are far too complex to have come about by chance, but it also helped to weaken it. How could a divine creator responsible for all that is good also have created the cruelty in nature? A much discussed example of this cruelty are the ichneumon flies who lay their eggs in a host. Once these eggs hatch they feed off their host until they have killed it. How could a benevolent creator allow things like this to happen? It has to be an example of adaptation to environment.The theory of design verse evolution was, and still is, studied by countless scientists. One scientist, a naturalist, whose theories helped to argue for evolution and against design was Lamarck. Although he did not receive any accolades for his work during his lifetime, Lamarck was studying and publishing in support of evolution as far back as the early 1800"s. Lamarck's "First Rule" is a great example of his beliefs. Simple stated Lamarck's "First Rule" says that use or disuse causes structures to enlarge or shrink.It is interesting to think what side of the argument I would have been on had I been alive in the early 1800's. The reality is, despite any evidence against it, as a Roman Catholic woman in the early 1800's I would have had almost no choice but to believe in Design. Women were not well read at the time and less likely then men to speak out against popular thinking.Works Cited:www.healthgrades.comhttp:www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/history/Lamarck.htmlHadley, James. Science and Religion: Some Historical Perspective. Cambridge University Press, 1991