Q&A: The Human Being — A Wonderful Machine, or a Failed Factory?
The Human Being — A Wonderful Machine, or a Failed Factory?
Question
Hello Rabbi,
Has a decisive refutation of the argument from design/complexity been found?
One that smoothly and quickly proves the existence of the world as a random (and defective) world.
The quote is taken from the Davidson Institute — the Weizmann Institute. From an article titled: What Is Life?
"The human being, not a wonderful machine
It is almost inconceivable to think that all this developed randomly from meaningless compounds, without a guiding hand. "Look at the wonder of nature's perfection and tell me this all came to be just like that," the outreach preacher will challenge me. And not only him. When one looks at the workings of nature and the human body, all that remains is to affirm: the harmony is perfect, the complexity is immense and astonishing, and everything is in its place fulfilling its proper role.
Yet when you descend to the scale at which a single cell is considered large, you find that the picture is different. A close look at the genome and proteome, the world of genetics and biochemistry, reveals a motley collection of frayed edges, disorder, and confusion in which you can't make head or tail of anything. Everything is built by improvisation, patch upon patch. There is no taboo. Anything goes. There is not even one rule for which no exception can be found.
The genes are carelessly scattered across the chromosomes, distorted at random and finding new roles. If the gene that yesterday served to prevent oxidation can be today's fruit color, why not? Cells are created only to be destroyed immediately, proteins are painstakingly produced and then torn to pieces once they are completed, signals compete with contradictory signals over the transmission of a chemical message – total systemic madness.
Most likely, every experienced biologist would agree that when it comes to the body, relying on healthy human logic will only land us in a sickbed. A problem that a human being would solve in one way will be solved in the body differently, in a way that will usually be many times more complex and cumbersome. Almost always, things will be carried out through puzzling, roundabout, long, and confused detours."…
Answer
This is a collection of nonsense that it is hard to believe was written by someone who knows how to read and write. Clearly he doesn't know physics, and apparently not biology either. In short, the man is an idiot. What exactly here am I supposed to address? What isn't explained in the booklet?
By the way, a few days ago someone here quoted something similar from the Davidson Institute. Maybe they've decided to launch a war against common sense. That's fine, except that when religious people do it everyone mocks them, and when academics do it, it sounds learned and authoritative.
Discussion on Answer
There definitely are many examples of things in nature that seem to be designed in a non-optimal way. Many experiments have shown that you can take proteins and enzymes and make them better in the lab. One example Dawkins brings somewhere is the urinary tract, which takes a very long route before exiting the body, and that sometimes causes medical complications. When a kidney is transplanted, they shorten the tube a lot, and it works excellently.
You shouldn't believe anyone; you should think. That's always recommended.
As for things that aren't designed optimally, that's obvious. I addressed this in my book and also in the third booklet. It doesn't touch the argument from design in the slightest.
If so, does the Rabbi have an explanation for why God chose to create the world this way?
No. And that really doesn't matter for the argument. I explained that there.
Though that is only according to the view that He indeed created the creatures in the world that way. In my opinion, He did not create the world that way; rather, evolution created it that way (and He created evolution).
A dispute among physicists. Whom should one believe?