Richard Dawkins Intelligent Design Theory

638 Words2 Pages

In this essay I will discuss that I do not agree with Richard Dawkins and will prove this by using the theory of Intelligent Design as to why I do not agree with him.
The Intelligent Design Theory says that intelligent causes are necessary to explain the complicated structures of biology and that these causes are analytically evident. Certain biological features defy the random-chance explanation because they appear to have been designed. Since design logically requires an intelligent designer, the appearance of design means there is evidence for a designer.
I will be discussing the following three arguments in the Intelligent Design Theory:
• Irreducible complexity
• Specified complexity
• The anthropic principle.
Irreducible complexity is a system which is composed of many interacting parts that contribute to the basic function. The removal of any one of the parts in the system causes the system to effectively stop functioning. Life is comprised of intertwined parts that rely on each other in order to be useful. Random mutation may account for the development of a new part, but it cannot account for the simultaneous development of multiple parts necessary for a functioning system. An example to explain this argument is the human eye, in order for the eye to be fully functioning it needs the eyeball, the optic nerve and the visual cortex; a randomly mutated incomplete eye would actually be bad to the survival of a species and would therefore be eliminated through the process of natural selection. An eye is not a useful system unless all its parts are present and functioning properly at the same time.
The specified complexity argument states that it is impossible for complex patterns to be developed through random

Open Document