What he probably meant is: if the human eye had been designed, then the designer is an idiot. Which is correct. Anyone could have designed the human eye much better, if she had unlimited power.
Ciao
- viole
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Is Richard Dawkin's view that the human eye was designed by an idiot really science ?
- Thread starter whirlingmerc
- Start date
-
- Tags
- evolution
What he probably meant is: if the human eye had been designed, then the designer is an idiot. Which is correct. Anyone could have designed the human eye much better, if she had unlimited power.
Ciao
- viole
I wouldn't conclude that a self-focusing, self-cleaning, self-repairing, full color "camera" with the ability to track moving objects and images smoothly, to recognize patterns and shapes, and to see in three dimensions, and in varying degrees of light, as being designed by an idiot. I might conclude that one who denies the need for a designer for such a masterpiece suffers from mental blindness.
McBell
Unbound
That is only because you do not understand the flaws in human eye.
But you have never before let your ignorance of something stop you from making bold empty claims.
Some of that list takes place in the brain, not the eye. Full color? -- a tiny sliver of the EM spectrum.
I might conclude that one who needs to make up an invisible magician to explain a complicated-looking device suffers from a poor education in biology.
We only perceive a narrow range of the available wavelengths. I wouldn't say the eye was designed by an idiot. I think we are very carefully designed.
I believe our brains are incapable of handling all the input that is out there. We are still primitive flesh and bone and, as a result of that, we have a sort of built-in governor which, in psych patients, is short-circuited so that they take onboard more than the usual input.
There are a couple of unusual conditions that are evidence that the brain is capable of far more complex operations -
Hyperthymesia - the ability to remember every day of your life
Synesthesia - the ability to see numbers as shapes and colors and the increased ability to recall names, addresses, and phone numbers
Based on the brain's advanced abilities in other areas, I would say that the eye was not designed by an idiot, but that the visual input and the evaluation and interpretation of that input is limited in its capacity by the brain.
We don't know what the universe really looks like. We are forced to rely on a complex electrochemical process within the brain to help us navigate the real landscape.
I believe our brains are incapable of handling all the input that is out there. We are still primitive flesh and bone and, as a result of that, we have a sort of built-in governor which, in psych patients, is short-circuited so that they take onboard more than the usual input.
There are a couple of unusual conditions that are evidence that the brain is capable of far more complex operations -
Hyperthymesia - the ability to remember every day of your life
Synesthesia - the ability to see numbers as shapes and colors and the increased ability to recall names, addresses, and phone numbers
Based on the brain's advanced abilities in other areas, I would say that the eye was not designed by an idiot, but that the visual input and the evaluation and interpretation of that input is limited in its capacity by the brain.
We don't know what the universe really looks like. We are forced to rely on a complex electrochemical process within the brain to help us navigate the real landscape.
I do not accept your claim that there are "flaws" in the human eye. But even if I did, (which I don't), this would not disprove the fact that the human eye displays all the hallmarks of design. And your appeal to personal insults says more of you than it does of me.
OK, if you don't like "flaws" let's just say an engineer could improve the design.
I'll concede that the eye may look designed to one not aware of the history of light detection and the small improvements over the eons that led to the various types of eyes we see today. Like all biological features, the eye is the result of small, incremental changes through the fairly simple, intuitive mechanisms of evolution you (should have) learned in biology class.
I'll concede that the eye may look designed to one not aware of the history of light detection and the small improvements over the eons that led to the various types of eyes we see today. Like all biological features, the eye is the result of small, incremental changes through the fairly simple, intuitive mechanisms of evolution you (should have) learned in biology class.
McBell
Unbound
Except the human eye does not display all the hallmarks of design.
And that you so readily lie about it reveals much more about you than it does about me.
Zosimus
Active Member
Speculation.
OK, perhaps not anyone, but anyone with any training in engineering.
But that's neither here nor there. There is only one reasonable explanation; only one that fits the observations, The only alternative is an appeal to magic, which is an emotional grasping at straws in a desperate attempt to preserve a fable-based ego-identity in the face of massive evidence to the contrary.
I don't think your post needs nor deserves a response.
McBell
Unbound
and yet you responded....
no worries mate, I understand that you are at odds between your beliefs and the truth.
Everyone goes through it.
Thief
Rogue Theologian
I saw a science demo years ago.....let me see if I can cough it back up.....
light penetrates water just so many feet under the surface
fish living near the surface become sensitive to the light above them
mostly for heat
years go by....and....
fish that realize a 'shadow' overhead learn to reflex
they survive
the skin becomes more sensitive and then more pronounced
the 'hemisphere' begins to form to focus the light to more sensitive nerves
the more pronounced the sphere shape.....better focus
years go by.....and....
the lateral reflex brings hemispheres in more than one location
to the left and to the right
years go by....and....
the span of incoming light sharpens to greater clarity
years go by....and....
those with eyes that 'see'......crawl out of the ocean
years go by.......
light penetrates water just so many feet under the surface
fish living near the surface become sensitive to the light above them
mostly for heat
years go by....and....
fish that realize a 'shadow' overhead learn to reflex
they survive
the skin becomes more sensitive and then more pronounced
the 'hemisphere' begins to form to focus the light to more sensitive nerves
the more pronounced the sphere shape.....better focus
years go by.....and....
the lateral reflex brings hemispheres in more than one location
to the left and to the right
years go by....and....
the span of incoming light sharpens to greater clarity
years go by....and....
those with eyes that 'see'......crawl out of the ocean
years go by.......
Zosimus
Active Member
I'm from the show-me state. So show me a verted eye that is superior to the best inverted eye. Or design one.
Don't worry. I'm not holding my breath.
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
How about the blind spot?
Demonslayer
Well-Known Member
Of course, I don't see any other possible way to read his comment. Creationists like to marvel about how God "created" things like the eye and how super perfect and wonderful it is, when the truth is the eye sucks! Over 40% of humans have myopia. If you were a manufacturer and 40% of your product rolled off the line not working properly, would you marvel at how great your factory was?
The most powerful, perfect being in the universe creates a visual device that doesn't work properly 4 out of 10 times. LOL. And that doesn't even begin to consider the improvements the UberDude could have made. Why can't I zoom in to see something far away? Why can't I see in the dark? Why can't I see clearly under water? I mean I just designed a better eye in three minutes without even thinking about it. Just give me God's magical poofing power and we'd all have way better eyes. Did he just not think these things through? Idiot indeed.
Zosimus
Active Member
Myopia is associated with lower vitamin D status in young adults.
Your argument is like saying that your car is a bad design because if you don't put oil in it, it starts working badly.
By your logic, every 6-cylinder engine cannot have been designed because 3- and 4-cylinder engines work just fine with fewer cylinders.
Your argument is like saying that your car is a bad design because if you don't put oil in it, it starts working badly.
By your logic, every 6-cylinder engine cannot have been designed because 3- and 4-cylinder engines work just fine with fewer cylinders.
On top of that, I "wonder" why creationists use the eye, as a frequent example, and not the whole brain, which seems, prima facie, more complex.
Probably they do not consider it reliable enough. Who can say?
Ciao
- viole
What about it?