Morality - Relative or Objective?

[Beanybag]

An algorithm is simply a function that, given an input, produces an expected output. There can be natural sorting algorithms (take the water example), or natural selection algorithms (most notably natural selection in evolution). I identify and call it an algorithm because that's what it is. If I call something, say, inertia, does that mean it's necessarily related to a designer? Or is it simply recognizing a concept based on a human invented definition and assigning this concept to a real event? It was interesting that you didn't address my funnel example, however, as there are many naturally occurring funnel type objects.

[jlay]

Beany,

You've yet to specifically answer any of the direct questions or challenges posited to you.
Inertia, gravity, etc. are the results of bodies acting on another. I almost included a gravity example, but didn't want to muddy the water. Which is all you've done here. It's a red herring. I didn't see the point in addresseing your funnel example.

when water is poured in a funnel, the funnel acts as an algorithm for determining the position of the water - the water will go to the middle and out the whole. It create organization of the water. I'm guessing we have different definitions here, or you're mistaken.

The funnel doesn't "act,' in the sense you are attempting to imply. But either way the point doesn't relate. The funnel is a physical entity. You may be able to formulate in your mind an algorithm to show what is occuring with the funneling of water, but the funnel is not itself an algorithm. You are mistaken. At least with the funnel, it is a tangible entity. NS is a man made contruct. So, you have still failed to defend your position.

The ultimate issue again is that you are smuggling in God to deny him. Your positions require that God be, yet you defile his name and give credit where credit isn't due. Stop this nonsense.