WILLIAM PALEY, AND BEFORE HIM,
DAVID HUME, AND MANY OTHERS
HAD NOTICED DESIGN
IN THE WORLD--
IN THE WING OF THE
EAGLE, IN THE HUMAN EYE,
IN ALL OF THE WONDERFUL ORGANS
AND APPENDAGES SO INTRICATELY
DESIGNED TO DO VERY
PARTICULAR PURPOSES.
PALEY'S FAMOUS EXAMPLE,
IT'S JUST FINDING A WATCH
AND KNOWING FROM AN
EXAMINATION OF ITS INTRICACIES
AND OF ITS SUBTLE
MEANS-ENDS ECONOMY OF DESIGN
THAT IT HAD TO HAVE A DESIGNER.
OR SO PALEY ARGUED.
NOW, SOME PEOPLE
INTERPRET DARWIN
AS OVERTHROWING THE PREMISE
OF PALEY'S ARGUMENT.
I THINK THAT'S THE
WRONG WAY TO LOOK AT IT.
I THINK THAT DARWIN SAID, YES.
THERE IS DESIGN.
THERE IS DESIGN.
PALEY'S RIGHT.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT
REQUIRES EXPLANATION.
HE'S WRONG IN SUPPOSING
THAT WHERE THERE IS DESIGN,
THERE HAS TO BE A DESIGNER THAT
IS A MIND, THAT IS A UNITARY,
ON HIGH ARTIFICER
OR INTELLIGENCE.
THAT JOB OF DESIGN--
WHICH IS A REAL JOB-- IT'S
WHAT MODERN INDUSTRY WOULD CALL
R&D, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.
AND IT COSTS MONEY.
IT COSTS TIME AND EFFORT.
THAT TASK OF R&D HAS TO
HAVE BEEN ACCOMPLISHED
BY SOMETHING-- IF NOT BY A
SINGLE, MIRACULOUS DESIGNER,
THEN BY SOME PROCESS THAT
HAS EXPLOITED RESOURCES
FOR A VERY LONG PERIOD OF TIME.
SO WHAT HE DID WAS HE
TOOK THE IDEA OF DESIGN.
AND HE SHOWED HOW
THE WORK COULD BE
DONE WITH LOTS OF TINY,
LITTLE MOMENTS OF MINDLESSNESS
RATHER THAN ONE, GREAT,
BIG, MIRACULOUS LUMP.
SO WHAT DARWIN SAW WAS THAT
YOU COULD HUSBAND THE PRODUCT.
YOU COULD ACCUMULATE
DESIGN IN LOTS
OF TINY, INDIVIDUALLY
MINDLESS MOMENTS.
AND AS LONG AS YOU COULD SAVE
THEM, AND REUSE THEM, AND REUSE
THEM, IT'S REALLY A
PRINCIPLE, YOU MIGHT SAY,
OF UNIVERSAL PLAGIARISM.
THIS ONE, LITTLE, TINY BIT
OF DESIGN, YOU SAVE IT.
AND YOU CAN COPY IT, AND
COPY IT, AND COPY IT.
AND THAT RAISES
THE PLAYING FIELD,
RAISES THE BENCH ON WHICH
YOU START JUST A LITTLE BIT.
THEN YOU WAIT AROUND TILL
ANOTHER LITTLE INCREMENT
OF DESIGN HAPPENS.
YOU SAVE THAT.
PRESERVE IT.
REALLY, THE PRINCIPLE
OF NATURAL SELECTION
MIGHT BE CALLED THE PRINCIPLE
OF DESIGN ACCUMULATION.
SO IT IS DESIGN, I SAY.
SOME PEOPLE WOULD SAY,
NO, THAT'S NOT DESIGN.
BECAUSE THERE ISN'T A DESIGNER.
WELL, IF YOU DEFINE DESIGN AS
REQUIRING A DESIGNER, THEN YES,
IT'S NOT REAL DESIGN.
BUT THEN IT'S SOMETHING ELSE.
AND IT'S EVERY BIT AS WONDERFUL.
IN FACT, IT'S, IF
ANYTHING, MORE WONDERFUL.
I SOMETIMES MARVEL AT PEOPLE
WHO WILL SAY TO ME, WELL,
I CAN SEE HOW THIS MINDLESS,
GRADUAL PROCESS COULD CREATE,
SAY, BIOLOGICAL
SPECIES-- ALL THE ORGANS
THAT WE OBSERVE IN
ANIMALS, PLANTS.
BUT I DON'T SEE HOW
IT COULD EXPLAIN, SAY,
POETRY, THE PRODUCTS
OF A HUMAN MIND.
AND MY RESPONSE TO
THAT IS, WAIT A MINUTE.
YOU THINK THAT
NATURAL SELECTION CAN
EXPLAIN A NIGHTINGALE, BUT
NOT AN ODE TO A NIGHTINGALE?
YOU THINK AN ODE
TO A NIGHTINGALE
IS THAT MUCH MORE WONDERFUL
THAN THE NIGHTINGALE ITSELF?
WHAT HUBRIS!
IF YOU THINK THAT,
YOU DON'T REALIZE
HOW WONDERFUL A NIGHTINGALE IS.
IF NATURAL SELECTION CAN
EXPLAIN A NIGHTINGALE,
IT CAN EXPLAIN A POEM
ABOUT A NIGHTINGALE, TOO.
I'M SURE OF THAT.
