The Magic of Design Intuition

This is yet another Klinghoffer post at the Discovery Institute’s creationist blog about the glorious book by Doug Axe. It’s titled Putting Words to the Universal Design Intuition. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us:

The silliest objection yet to the argument in Doug Axe’s new book [link omitted], is that he’s saying because we share an intuition of design, therefore the intuition has merit. Of course not.

That’s not what they’ve been saying? Well then, let’s see what the message really is. Klinghoffer tells us:

Many intuitions are flat-out wrong. With others, though, as Dr. Axe explains here, you can put words to them, spell out their logic, and that logic turns out to be compelling — in this case, valid and confirmed by science.

Compelling? We haven’t noticed. Confirmed by science? That hasn’t been demonstrated yet. Maybe it will be in Klinghoffer’s post. Let’s read on:

“Putting words to it” is what Axe does in Undeniable [his new book]. To argue with this intuition, you need to grapple with those words, that logic, and that science.

Okay, we’re ready to grapple. Klinghoffer continues:

Axe calls it a universal design intuition but, if you want to be pedantic, it’s more like “near-universal.”

Oh. Some defective individuals — who must be fools! — don’t share the intuition. Here’s more:

A friend and I were talking about this distinction the other day. There are indeed a few people who see a butterfly and never in the least feel, or never feel and then suppress, the sensation that surely this took ingenuity to bring into being.

Gasp! How can they be so blind? Klinghoffer explains:

But for every ordinary human endowment, there is some minority born with the endowment impaired or absent.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! If you don’t have the universal creationist intuition, you must be defective! But Klinghoffer feels your pain:

This is generally understood as a handicap, often tragic, certainly a cause for compassion.

And now we come to the end:

A congenital inability to sense design? Only in evolutionary biology would that be considered an advantage.

How much longer will the Discoveroids promote this theme? It doesn’t matter. We’re enjoying it as long as it lasts.

Copyright © 2016. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

20 responses to “The Magic of Design Intuition

  1. michaelfugate

    That people see design and don’t see God is not a defect. The problem with seeing God is that one can’t then distinguish between design and the lack thereof. That we have known this for centuries and that natural selection explains design without intelligence, is simply ignored.

  2. A friend and I were talking about this distinction the other day. There are indeed a few people who see a butterfly and never in the least feel, or never feel and then suppress, the sensation that surely this took ingenuity to bring into being.

    I’ve had lots of conversations like that in pubs.

  3. Derek Freyberg

    Good g*d, it’s the old sensus divinitatis revived again. I would say “shades of Alvin Plantinga”, but I don’t think he’s a shade yet.

  4. Intuition? and they are talking about Creation SCIENCE? It’s hard to make a case for science when it’s tied to intuition. That’s the kind of reasoning that condemned Galileo!

  5. Klinghoffer must have very few friends, if he deems anyone who doesn’t think like he does to be mentally defective. I wonder if he has any friends at all.

    If Kling and the DI ever achieve their dream of a universal theocracy, presumably the rational population will be locked away in mental institutions.

  6. As with many creationist arguments, this strikes me as projection. The collection of neurons in his brain can’t understand reality, so those who do must be “defective”.

  7. Charles Deetz ;)

    See a butterfly, be amazed at its intricate design. Maybe wonder ‘who did this’. See the huge variety of butterflies, learn how far they travel, their strange life cycles starting as a different animal, and you wonder how in the world anyone (single person/diety/spirit/oggidity boogity) would have come up with it as a living thing. Intuition goes the other way. Sorry Klingy, I ain’t buying it.

  8. A friend and I were talking about this distinction the other day. There are indeed a few people who see a butterfly and never in the least feel, or never feel and then suppress, the sensation that surely this took ingenuity to bring into being. . . . But for every ordinary human endowment, there is some minority born with the endowment impaired or absent.

    I see. so those who don’t accept “intelligent design,” and thus God, and thus Genesis, are born impaired.

    What should be done with such unfortunates, then? Should they be institutionalized and subjected to “conversion therapy”? Should those for whom such “therapy’ doesn’t work be penned up in camps, ahem, reservations? Should they be executed as threats to our God-fearin’ Christian republic?

    Be afraid, unbelievers. Be very afraid.

  9. Creationists appear to have a congenital inability to make sense. This happens when anyone thoroughly avoids using any critical reasoning.

  10. Take any kid to a zoo’s primate house, and the kid’s intuition will be that the “monkeys” are so much like us.
    The Bible observes
    “For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man hath no preeminence above a beast: for all is vanity.”
    (Ecclesiastes 3:19)
    John Wesley:
    “… We now come to a numerous tribe, that seem to make approaches even to humanity; that bear an awkward resemblance to the human form, and discover the same faint efforts at intellectual sagacity.
    “Animals of the MONKEY class are furnished with hands instead of paws; their ears, eyes, eye-lids, lips, and breasts, are like those of mankind; their internal conformation also bears some distant likeness; and the whole offers a picture that may mortify the pride of such as make their persons the principal objects of their admiration.
    (A Survey of the Wisdom of God in the Creation; Or A Compendium of Natural Philosophy” New York: Bangs and T. Mason, 1823, Part the Second, Chapter I, volume 1, pages 147-148. )

  11. Christine Janis

    “If Kling and the DI ever achieve their dream of a universal theocracy, ”

    The Kling and DI?

  12. Hans-Richard Grümm

    There are some people who step outside on a plain, and never feel, or suppress, the immediate sensation that the Earth has to be flat.

  13. Klinghoffer is saying atheists and agnostics are defective. This is a dangerous and very disturbing message.

    What might happen if a demagogue is elected as “supreme ruler” and decreed that all “defectives” must be removed from our society?

  14. If I was the benevolent designer, I doubt I’d come up with a butterfly that started out as a pupa.

  15. I measure my intuition with a variety of units.

    I see a butterfly: 7 inklings
    I see a fox: 13 hunches
    I see a whale: 29 gut reactions

    These are all US Customary units of measure. I’m slowly transitioning into metric units, specifically the “Premonition.” There are 9 kilopremonitions when I see a bacterial flagellum.

  16. If you ever see a beautiful caterpillar and can’t suppress the intuition that it’s designed, ponder for a moment who designed the caterpillar that just ate your crops.

  17. Klapperkrapper is feeling the pinch, probably from Curmie’s wedgie. The K-meister is getting klobbered in the komments on his unconditional, uncritical, unreadable praise for Axe’s “feely goody” essay.

    How come it’s always a butterfly and not an isopod? What do the Tooters have against isopods? Did you know that you can now buy a large, plush isopod toy to give to that favorite niece or nephew whom you would like to torment with night terrors for the next decade? It’s twue! It’s twue!

    Adorable Klingable Isopod Plush Toy

    I tell ya, the Tooters really put the maroon in macaroon!

  18. michaelfugate

    It is interesting that ingenuity which Kinghoffer uses results from a confusion…

    late 16th century (also in the senses ‘nobility’ and ‘ingenuousness’): from Latin ingenuitas ‘ingenuousness,’ from ingenuus ‘inborn.’ The current meaning arose by confusion of ingenuous with ingenious.

  19. Hey Curmie! This is Off-Topic, but too good to pass up

    http://rna-mediated dot com/

    Might qualify for a Buffoon award. I found the owner heckling Carl Zimmer on FB.

  20. Thanks for the hot tip, Tomato Addict. I took a look. [*Shudder*] No way I’m gonna spend any time on that stuff. He’s all yours!