Refuting Who Designed The Designer?

---

By Prayson Daniel

---

†

In “Dangerous Richard Dawkins’ Ideas?” I explained how Richard Dawkins’ The God Delusion central argument is fallacious namely charged with Non sequitur(Latin “it does not follow.”) Fallacy, that is even if we grant Richard Dawkins’ premises to be true, the conclusion does not follow from them.

In this article, I will go through Richard Dawkins’ statement(premise) three. It is the objection I countless receive in  my blog comments: Who Designed The Designer?(The God Delusion p. 157-8)

1. One of the greatest challenges to the human intellect has been to explain how the complex, improbable appearance of design in the universe arises.
2. The natural temptation is to attribute the appearance of design to actual design itself.
3. The temptation is a false one because the designer hypothesis immediately raises the larger problem of who designed the designer.

Flaw in Statement 3

[I]n order to recognize an explanation as the best, one needn’t have an explanation of the explanation. This is an elementary point concerning inference to the best explanation as practiced in the philosophy of science.

The Meaningless Life Of Atheism

Alfred Edward Housman (1859-1936) an English classical scholar and poet captured
the meaningless of life in a naturalist worldview in this brilliant poem :.

Tell me not here, it needs not saying

Tell me not here, it needs not saying,
  What tune the enchantress plays
In aftermaths of soft September
  Or under blanching mays,
For she and I were long acquainted
  And I knew all her ways. 

Nicolaus Copernicus On God

Nicolaus Copernicus (1473-1543), founder of Heliocentric Cosmology

1.  “To know the mighty works of God, to comprehend His wisdom and majesty and power, to appreciate, in degree, the wonderful working of His laws, surely all this must be a pleasing and acceptable mode of worship to the Most High, to whom ignorance cannot be more gratifying than knowledge.” (Copernicus, as cited in Neff 1952, 191-192; and in Hubbard 1905, v).

2. “Not the Grace received by Paul do I desire,

Nor the good will with which Thou forgavest Peter,

Only that which Thou didst grant the thief on the cross,

That mercy I ask of Thee.”

(Copernicus, as cited in Trepatschko 1994, Vol. 44).

Dangerous Richard Dawkins’ Ideas?

---

By Prayson Daniel

---

†

This article is a result of edited answers on objections, and comments rose by brilliant atheists on my blog With All I Am God. The topic is Richard Dawkins’ view of religion, logical errors, and  Moral value and duties in his different work.

Non-Sequitur: The God Delusion’s Central Argument

Richard Dawkins’ Central Argument of The God Delusion(On pages 157-8 ) commits Non sequitur(Latin “it does not follow.”) Fallacy.

In Non Sequitur a conclusion is drawn which does not follow from the premises. This is not a specific fallacy but a very general term for a bad argument.

Example:

1. Evolution is true
2. Evil exist
3. Therefore God does not exist.(The conclusion does not follow from the premises)

Dawkin’s The God delusion’s central argument:

1. One of the greatest challenges to the human intellect has been to explain how the complex, improbable appearance of design in the universe arises.
2. The natural temptation is to attribute the appearance of design to actual design itself.
3. The temptation is a false one because the designer hypothesis immediately raises the larger problem of who designed the designer.

Robert Boyle On God

Sir Robert Boyle (1627-1691), founder of Modern Chemistry

Boyle’s most significant religious works are Some Considerations Touching the Style of the Holy Scriptures (1661), The Excellency of Theology, Compared with Natural Philosophy (1674), and The Christian Virtuoso (1690). In his will Robert Boyle left funds for eight annual lectures (the famous Boyle Lectures, which still continue) “for proving the Christian Religion against notorious Infidels.”

1.  “When with bold telescopes I survey the old and newly discovered stars and planets, when with excellent microscopes I discern the unimitable subtility of nature’s curious workmanship; and when, in a word, by the help of anatomical knives, and the light of chemical furnaces, I study the book of nature, I find myself oftentimes reduced to exclaim with the Psalmist, ‘How manifold are Thy works, O Lord! In wisdom hast Thou made them all!’ ” (Boyle, as cited in Woodall 1997, 32).

2.  In The Excellency of Theology (1674), Boyle stated: “The vastness, beauty, orderliness of heavenly bodies, the excellent structure of animals and plants, and other phenomena of nature justly induce an intelligent, unprejudiced observer to conclude a supreme, powerful, just, and good Author.” (Boyle, as cited in Seeger 1985, 183-184).

James Clerk Maxwell On God

Sir James Clerk Maxwell (1831-1879), founder of Statistical Thermodynamics

According to the Encyclopaedia Britannica (1997): “James Clerk Maxwell is regarded by most modern physicists as the scientist of the 19th century who had the greatest influence on 20th-century physics; he is ranked with Sir Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein for the fundamental nature of his contributions.”  

1.  “Almighty God, who hast created man in Thine own image, and made him a living soul that he might seek after Thee and have dominion over Thy creatures, teach us to study the works of Thy hands that we may subdue the earth to our use, and strengthen our reason for Thy service; and so to receive Thy blessed Word, that we may believe on Him whom Thou hast sent to give us the knowledge of salvation and the remission of our sins. All which we ask in the name of the same Jesus Christ our Lord.” (Maxwell, as cited in Bowden 1998, 288; and in Williams and Mulfinger 1974, 487).

2.  “I think the more we enter together into Christ’s work He will have the more room to work His work in us. For He always desires us to be one that He may be one with us. Our worship is social, and Christ will be wherever two or three are gathered together in His name.” (Maxwell, as cited in Campbell and Garnett 1882, 312).

Why Does God Allow Suffering?

---

By Prayson Daniel

---

†

One of the greatest objection of existence of God is problem of pain, suffering. If there is a God why so much suffering? Medical doctor, Justin Thacker answers this question in a reasonable, easy to understand, and great power point presentation that will expand how you think about Existence of God and problem of Suffering.

Part 1 Intellectual Problem of Suffering