Intelligent Design, the view that certain features of life and the universe seem to have been designed, is not a new argument. It merely has a new name. It comes from a group of philosophical arguments collectively known as the
Teleological Argument, or Argument by Design.
The most famous of these includes the Watchmaker Analogy by William Paley.
Even Charles Darwin, before his fateful voyage, was swayed by the force of Paley's arguments. Which shows that Darwin, though brilliant, was also a bit gullible. Because I, in two quick logical thrusts, am going to completely destroy the watchmaker analogy.
I'll be right back, after this message brought to you by Rachel Wacholder, and a giant, severed ear...
And we're back.
First, a quick synopsis for those of you too lazy to follow the above Wikipedia links, or to take an undergrad philosophy class.
The Watchmaker's Analogy goes like this:
You're walking through a field, in nature, and you stumble across a watch. Instantly you know that the watch did not come to exist in that field on its own, but was designed and brought there by some intelligent force.
Really, that's about the gist of it. By analogy, we are to accept that the universe, like a watch, seems to be designed, and must therefore have a designer.
THRUST ONE: Is it different?
Let us agree that the watch is different from the rest of the field. The grass, insects, dirt, flowers, etc., all integrate. The watch does not. As Sesame Street would tell you, "one of these things is not like the others."
However, knowing the watch is different is not enough? How is the watch different. Think carefully. The watch is different because we know exactly how it was made. There is no mystery. It is designed, artificial. While ordered and functional, the designed item is not as beautiful as a daisy, not as complex as a dragonfly. It cannot breed like a rabbit, or heal itself like a lizard.
In short, the one thing in the field that is perhaps the least complex and the least interesting, is the one thing that is known to be designed.
THRUST TWO: If the watch is different, and designed...
We have agreed that the watch is indeed different from the other things in the field, and that is because the watch is obviously designed. In fact, it quite possibly has the date of manufacture, and the maker's name inscribed. And if the watch is different because it is designed, by inference, everything else is naturally occurring: has no designer. After all, if the watch and everything else in the field were all designed, how could we tell the difference between them?
Yes, it's that simple. The Watchmaker's Analogy hoisted on its own petard. The field (and everything in it) cannot be designed -- it is naturally occuring. This is obvious when you compare it to the watch.