Donald Duck ponders: "Maybe your design wasn't intelligent enough!"
I've been seeing on Google that there seems to be a lot of academic stuff written in defense of (evolutionary) Intelligent Design. In the next philosophy-discussion meeting I attend, a member is going to give us supposed evidence to justify belief in this.
Unfortunately, the idea behind Intelligent Design can be linked to the Rev. Paisley's "Proof of God's Existence". A primitive wandering along a beach finds a working watch on the sand and marvels at the intricacy of it - then looks around at all the wonderful examples of nature and says to himself, "This thing in my hand could not have come-to-be by accident or from nothing. It must surely have had a creator. But when I look about me at the marvels of nature, surely I am obliged to conclude - just as with this object - there must be the intelligence of a divine designer and creator behind it.
Of course he is not obliged at all to think that. The primitive fellow would be more inclined to use his common sense and put the thing he has found into the category of his stone ax, but assume that its maker would be a being very strange and powerful - a spirit or god. If he did so, he would be making a correct distinction between the made or manufactured creation of things and the things that are self-created or appear in the natural formations of the environment, The fact that we need to and easily make this distinction between what is 'manufactured' and what has evolved to "grow like Topsy" does rather make nonsense of the very idea of Intelligent Design. For making that distinction is at the very basis of our understanding of reality. Without it, confusion would reign and accumulation of knowledge, or science, would be impossible. (Apol. to Disney for taking picture out of context)