Friday, 23 October 2020   

You are here: Home Dawkins New Atheists
Richard Dawkins: Only the 'Appearance' of 'Design for Purpose': Blind Physical Forces 'Mimic Conscious Design' to Create Complex Entities
Posted by Abu.Iyaad, Editor in Dawkins on Saturday, October 12, 2013

  Mail To Friend    Printer Friendly Bookmark and Share

In his article, The Necessity of Darwinism. (New Scientist, vol. 94, 15 April 1982) Dawkins asserts (p. 130), emphasis is ours:

The more statistically improbable a thing is, the less can we believe that it just happened by blind chance. Superficially the obvious alternative to chance is an intelligent Designer. But Charles Darwin showed how it is possible for blind physical forces to mimic the effects of conscious design, and, by operating as a cumulative filter of chance variations, to lead eventually to organized and adaptive complexity, to mosquitoes and mammoths, to humans and therefore, indirectly, to books and computers.

The underlined words are to indicate that neither Dawkins or any other atheist on the planet is able to escape teleological language in the description, study and analysis of life, the world and the universe. The rational intelligibility of all of that (the universe and life) is recognized innately (see here) and practically self-evident. On this basis is man able to observe, analogize, and infer and develop knowledge of the working order of the universe, rationally. This in itself makes it practically self-evident that the universe and life on Earth is designed to be as it is. However, the above quote is one of many showing a man like Dawkins who cannot trust his own physical senses is not a man to be trusted to explain the origins of life. This is because although his physical senses see actual design his arrogance sees only an illusion of design explained by blind, purposeless, forces acting on random events.


Dawkins begins by stating a truth, "The more statistically improbable a thing is, the less can we believe that it just happened by blind chance." This means that we are only left with two other choices, a) necessity by which the physical forces such as gravity are intended, so for example, if you drop an apple, by necessity (of the law of gravity) it will fall to the ground, or b) a creator. Knowing that the innate disposition and sound reason can never attribute design (and purpose) except to an agent with knowledge, will and power, Dawkins begins his psychological trickery on his audience. "Superficially..." he says. Meaning it is superficial to attribute what is clearly observable design (which he also tries to negate through psychological trickery and word play) to a being with the qualities required for design (knowledge, will, power). This is despite the fact that the sum whole of human experience, their day-to-day activity, and their entire industrial and technological enterprise is built upon the non-superficial presupposition that only knowledge, will and creative power lead to design. Thus, knowing that he cannot attribute knowledge, will and creative power to "physical forces" or "physical laws" he then brings his red herring, "But Charles Darwin showed how it is possible for blind physical forces to mimic the effects of conscious design..." Charles Darwin offered an explanation for life's diversity based upon blind physical forces acting on a primeval soup leading to replicable life leading (through mutations in genetic code) to the origin and diversity of species, and in this entire process, these "blind physical forces" "mimic the effects of conscious design." without there being actual design. You can see the play with words here. Neither Charles Darwin nor anyone else, has (or ever will) be able to provide empirical evidence for this assertion which actually underlies the entire naturalist religion. Think about that again, because in dismantling the naturalist religion, we have to really get to the core of it, and this is the actual core of it: Blind physical forces acting on a primeval soup leading to replicable life leading (through random mutations in genetic code) to the origin and diversity of species, all through undirected, purposeless processes. Naturalists play word games in that the word evolution is often presented with layers of meaning that are aimed at concealing the superstitious belief it is founded upon. We will elaborate upon this in more detail in a separate article. But to complete this point, there is no empirical evidence for the emergence of self-replication in the form of DNA or RNA through random undirected processes and all experimentation has miserably failed to produce anything remotely like the complex biological molecules found in living cells, even when generously supplied with many of the chemicals required for the formation of such molecules. This is taken as the only acceptable explanation because a philosophical assertion of naturalism allows no other explanation. Dawkins continues, "and, by operating as a cumulative filter of chance variations," note the desperate attempts here through careful wording of trying to portray, but from afar, the mimicking of "conscious design" he mentioned earlier. He wants there to be design but can't, so he has to make cunning use of language: "operating", "cumulative", "filter" "mimics", "conscious", "design". These blind physical forces somehow are able to "operate" as a "cumulative filter" to filter out chance variations and thereby choose the ones that are going to lead to life. The pauper is all but wanting to attribute "design" to these blind forces but can't (otherwise the game is up and the fraud is clear) and he uses doublespeak to say it is not design but just undirected processes that mimic design. So it is both design and not design at the same time. It is design and non-design. This is doublespeak and sophistry. And then he says, " lead eventually to organized and adaptive complexity, to mosquitoes and mammoths, to humans and therefore, indirectly, to books and computers" so the end result is "organized", "adaptive", "complexity" in the form of "humans", "books", "computers" - which to him have clearly not been designed but only give the illusion of design!

Lets summarize: Blind physical forces can mimic the effect of conscious design and direct chance occurrences in a certain way (by operating as a cumulative filter) leading eventually to "organized complexity." Or to put it another way, a totally blind and deaf man (Steve) can direct himself through the myriad of chance encounters (bumps and accidents) from John O Groats to Lands End through the operation of a cumulative filter (of which he is wholly unaware), thereby mimicking (unknowingly and without intent) the effect of conscious navigation through which Dave (who is hearing and seeing or who could be blind but receives instruction) also gets from John O Groats to Lands End. Finding a blind man at Lands End, it must be concluded that that's how he got there (through a random, blind process) and while that may be possible by a large stretch of the imagination, Dawkins is trying to insist that to think like this is rational and proposing anything else (such as a hearing and seeing man arriving at Lands End through conscious navigation or a blind man being directed and guided) is stupidity and make believe. To prove the likes of this, Richard Dawkins fills pages and writes books and launches diatribes. That's the sum of his knowledge. He tells us on the cover of his book, The Blind Watchmaker, wherein it is stated "Natural selection is the blind watchmaker, blind because it does not see ahead, does not plan consequences, has no purpose in view..." yes, a bit like the blind man in our example, "...Yet the living results of Natural Selection overwhelmingly impress us with the appearance of design as if by a master watchmaker, impress us with the illusion of design and planning. The purpose of this book is to resolve the paradox to the satisfaction of the reader, and the purpose of this chapter is further to impress the reader with the power of the illusion of design." Everything is an appearance and illusion of design. Why? Because affirming actual design necessitates a designer, through innate disposition, sensory perception and sound reason. That is a self-evident truth that cannot be argued against, it is ingrained in the human psyche (see here) Thus, Dawkins resigns to the world of appearances, illusions, blind watchmakers, mountains of improbability, word-play and doublespeak to make his case. Please follow up with this article "Understanding the Two Definitions of 'Science' in Operation" (see here) to see through the naturalist religion a bit more clearly.

Written by Abū ʿIyād on 07/12/1434H (12/10/2013CE)

Link to this article:   Show: HTML LinkFull LinkShort Link
Share or Bookmark this page: You will need to have an account with the selected service in order to post links or bookmark this page.

Subscribe via RSS or email:
Follow us through RSS or email. Click the RSS icon to subscribe to our feed.


Add a Comment
You must be registered and logged in to comment.

New Atheists
The Atheist Clinic

Latest Articles
'Who Created God?' Is an Illegitimate and Impossible Question Based Upon Confusion Between Categories
Materialism, Naturalism, Atheism Are Corruptions of Human Nature
Evidences of Rubūbiyyah: 'Cells Work Just Like Computers'
Chance, Probability and Atheists
Keeping a Stationary Earth Moving Through Imaginary Physics and Propping Up the Cosmic Religion of Giordano Bruno
2019 Templeton Prize Winner: Atheism Is Inconsistent With the Scientific Method
Evidences of Rubūbiyyah: Proteins Have 'Zip-Codes' (Postcodes) Which Determine Their Destinations
Why Naturalists, Materialists and Atheists Are Scared of 'Design in Nature' and 'Machine Metaphor'
Evidences of Rubūbiyyah: An Insect With Functional Gears in Its Legs
The Clinic: How Psychologically Insecure Atheists Comfort Themselves - Part 1

No pages found.

Most Popular
Caution Against Muslim Apologists: Zakir Naik, the Big Bang and the Qur'an
Planck Satellite Data, Lawrence Krauss and the Earth at the Center of the Universe
A Muslim's Guide to Naturalism, Atheism and Evolution
Evidences of Rubūbiyyah: Bioengineers Create Circuit Board Modelled on Human Brain
The Quran, the Sunnah and Modern Astronomy: Observations on the Solar System of the Astrologers
Ibn Taymiyyah on the Reasoning of the Atheist
The Three Levels of the Atheist Pyramid and the Naturalist (Materialist) Religion
The Atheistic World View Is Driven by Emotional and Psychological Preference, Not the Scientific Method
The Methods and Routes to Affirmation of a Maker Are Innumerable and Not Restricted
The Fitrah (Innate Disposition) Expressed by Atheist Richard Dawkins

Archives (View more)
2019 • July
2019 • June
2019 • May
2019 • April
2019 • March
2019 • February
2018 • December
2018 • November
2018 • October
2018 • January
2017 • February
2016 • February

Copyright © 2020 . All rights reserved. RSSTagsPrivacyLegal and Terms of UseSitemap