Does your definition of "designing" not include the concept of planning? I can see how "building" could forego planning (and result in poor products), but "design" implies planning I would argue.
Some comments about evolution:
1) Evolution very often has results that, if it were the product of design, would be considered very poor design
2) Evolution is not random luck. It is anything but random. Mutation is random, but evolution by natural selection is not.
3) Things do not evolve unless:
- there's replication
- there are mutations that natural selection can "see"
- there is pressure for certain kinds of mutations to be favored
1) Evolution always has results that will be considered poor design. Every time an evolved "design" becomes obsolete with respect to its surroundings, then it becomes a poor adaptation, at which point it must evolve again. But because this process is continuous, we consider this whole continuous process as evolution. As time increases, evolution will always force something to adjust to its environment and become perfect with it, therefore evolution as a whole can be considered absolute and perfect.
2) Evolution as a whole is absolute, so obviously it's not luck. The adaptations and changes before the perfect "design" arrives are determined by luck as you say.
When I say design I just mean the product of some systematic process. Planning is systematic, but so is evolution.
Comments
Does your definition of "designing" not include the concept of planning? I can see how "building" could forego planning (and result in poor products), but "design" implies planning I would argue.
Some comments about evolution:
1) Evolution very often has results that, if it were the product of design, would be considered very poor design
2) Evolution is not random luck. It is anything but random. Mutation is random, but evolution by natural selection is not.
3) Things do not evolve unless:
In response to your bullet points:
1) Evolution always has results that will be considered poor design. Every time an evolved "design" becomes obsolete with respect to its surroundings, then it becomes a poor adaptation, at which point it must evolve again. But because this process is continuous, we consider this whole continuous process as evolution. As time increases, evolution will always force something to adjust to its environment and become perfect with it, therefore evolution as a whole can be considered absolute and perfect.
2) Evolution as a whole is absolute, so obviously it's not luck. The adaptations and changes before the perfect "design" arrives are determined by luck as you say.
When I say design I just mean the product of some systematic process. Planning is systematic, but so is evolution.