Argument from poor design: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 03:34, 1 January 2006

Revision as of 22:39, 1 January 2006

Line 37:

== Criticism ==

<!-- this needs to be written in a more NPOV style -->

A response to the argument that some may find viable is that the argument is a ''[[non sequitur]]'', because it is comparable to arguing that the poor design of the [[Ford Pinto]] means that the Pinto was not designed., though of course a key difference is that no one is claiming divine origins for the [[Ford Pinto]].

Second, it creates a straw-man, because the Bible does not assert that God made life ''optimal'', but only that He made it ''good'', so that instances of "suboptimal design" are more a reflection of how we think things ''should'' have been designed than anything else. As such, the argument is essentially "pseudo-theological" in that it assumes how God ''should'' behave and notes that He didn't behave that way without addressing the possibility that God behaved differently than we thought He should.