Intelligent design thought exercize.

Let's take a look at the concept.

There are formal logical flaws all through it, but let's play on their level.

Part 1:

The idea is that, if one looks at the workings of a watch, the complexity and inter-connectedness of it leads one to conclude that it "obviously" was man-made, or created by an intelligence. Then, one looks around at the universe, and sees complexity, and inter-connectedness, and concludes that it too, was made by an intelligence.

Okay.

What about a drinking glass? Surely, this is just as "obviously" man-made. Yet, it has no complexity or inter-connectedness. What do the watch and the glass have in common that we see as evidence of their intelligent origins?


The quality is orderliness. The glass is smooth, clear, homogeneous, and has a regular shape.
The watch parts fit together neatly. The gear teeth are evenly spaced, the metal is smooth, and also homogeneous. THESE are the qualities that cause us to conclude that they are man-made.

Why do we see these qualities as evidence of intelligent origin? Our perceptions of man-made versus natural (God-made) are based on our accumulated experience moving through the world.
Man made things have order and purpose, naturally occurring things do not. (or if they do, we can't perceive it)

So, using the same sloppy logic as the original premise, it falls apart. Our perception of intelligent creation is based on how things are NOT like the universe at large.


-