Colbert v. Dawkins On Intelligibility

Yesterday I wrote about C.S. Lewis and one of the arguments for God's existence that Lewis advances in Mere Christianity, namely, the universality of the moral law. For Lewis, it made no sense that he should have a correct and comprehensible understanding of justice while the world - and the universe, for that matterfundamentally lacked comprehensibility (as it would if there was no mind at the source of existence). Lewis acknowledged the crux of the issue: he couldn't maintain that the world was fundamentally the result of chance and yet admit that his notion of justice was universally true.  

As I reflected on this passage, I thought of an exchange between Stephen Colbert and Richard Dawkins from a 2006 interview on The Colbert Report. It's somewhat easy to miss, and it comes near the end of the interview, but Colbert catches Dawkins in a transparently illogical claim: the idea that the universe and the world are not intelligently designed, but yet the things that are made by mancars, computers, telephones, books, etc.are intelligently designed. Colbert, in his humorous way, makes the point: How can man, the product (in Dawkins's framework) of a creation that has not been intelligently designed have the capacity to make the judgment (as Dawkins does) that the world has not been intelligently designed? 

Advertisement

Dawkins never explains.

 

 

 

 

Comments are automatically closed two weeks after an article's initial publication. See our comments policy for more.
J Cosgrove
3 years 8 months ago
One of the great myths that has been promoted by modern elites is that atheism is rational. This has been readily accepted by the educated who usually have not examined atheism in any detail. Nothing could be further from the truth. I have been debating atheist for almost 15 years since I discovered the people who are behind the Intelligent Design concepts. Atheism is an emotional commitment devoid of logic and any examination of science and the observable world. It is usually based on their opposition to things they find objectionable. Organized religion being the main thing they object to. Atheism is just a choice such as I am a St. Louis Cardinal fan or I like the Beatles, and today it is very fashionable to be an atheist because the intellectual elites endorse it. When pinned down the atheist will never justify their point of view but will almost always attack their debater instead. A few years ago in an interview, Richard Dawkins admitted in an interview that intelligent design made sense as long as the designer was not God.

Advertisement

The latest from america

Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick, retired archbishop of Washington, is pictured in a 2017 photo (CNS photo/Bob Roller) 
The case shows the mystifying complexity of the human person—or at least this human person.
James Martin, S.J.July 16, 2018
A front-page article published July 16 detailed the alleged abuse of two seminarians in the Diocese of Metuchen, New Jersey, by then-Bishop Theodore E. McCarrick.
Elsie Fisher (photo: A24)
Bo Burnham’s new movie is a joyous reminder that 13 is not, in fact, the best year of your life.
John AndersonJuly 16, 2018
A couple gets married in Stockholm, Sweden, in this 2013 file photo. (CNS photo/Fredrik Sandberg, EPA) 
“The right of Catholics to express disagreement with their leaders is a right as old as Peter and Paul.”
The EditorsJuly 16, 2018