Where do you want us to start?
A medical one will work fine.
Covered that on the previous page. The weapons are separated by the feats or class abilities needed to use them without penalty (Improved Unarmed Combat, Simple Weapons, Martial Weapons, and Exotic Weapons). They're all still listed on the same weapons chart.
Wrong.
Unarmed strikes are simple weapons, listed under simple weapons, but not under melee weapons.
Not to mention that the Improved Unarmed Strike feat doesn't avoid any penalty if you aren't proficient with simple weapons.
Read the rules.
Hands are defined as being "like melee weapons" because they fill a number of other roles. Defining them as just weapons would lead to rules conflict on the other end of this spectrum. The wirters get enough flak about poor editing as it is...
Nope.
Something can be a thing and be, at the same time, be considered something else, without
being something else.
Unarmed strikes
are a simple weapon that
isn't a melee one.
Read the table.
Again - you have not anwered the question(s). The nature of the definition determines the use. In English "designed for" has many many different uses and context applications. Depending on which one is being applied determines the nature of the meaning or "reading" in this case.
Am I answering to Stevie Wonder?
I have already wrote that "every meaning" you could give to that statement would klead us to the same result.
Would you try to find a meaning that could prove that you have a head "designed for close combat"?
It's going to be funny.
And again you haven't given the meaning. Also as has been pointed out many many times text supecedes tables.
The meaning?
If something is considered "x" I don't think what meaning could make it
being "x".
Not to mention that I don't see any text negating the table.
So now are we getting into the flame wars? I only asked a specific questions in order to trace the way that you are reading the meaning you are getting to this.
What the **** are you talking about?
Calm down, sir.
Mine was a logic question: it was asked to show you the difference between something that
is "x", and something else that
works like "x".
Yes, I did. You failed to define your terms, therefore, your statement has no meaning. Try again.
Sounds like Bill Clinton: "please define"yes".
Or something similar.
What should I define?
What your dictionary can show you?
Check out your PHB: look at the weapon table, compare it with the glossary and the combat chapter, and try to find a "meaning" to those words that can lead you to state that an unarmed strike is a melee weapon.
Remember: an unarmed strike, not a fist or something else.
? 
