Theories of Haphazard Design

It never ceases to amaze me that proponents of Intelligent Design tout the rigor of their methodology, yet refuse to further characterize that intelligent design. Thankfully, Haphazard scholars have taken that next step. Yet even within the Haphazard community, theories differ as to why the design was so haphazard.

A list of possibilities:

*The Designer was drunk.

*The Designer was a sadistic psychopath.

*It was the Designer's last day at work.

*The Designer was an egomaniac who thought He understood His users' requirements better than they did.

*The Designer tried too hard to be All Things for all people and allowed scope creep to overburden the product with defective features.

*The Designer was a control freak who accepted no input from His team, and who made sure that colleagues who knew better than He were banished to a hot stuffy basement.

*The Designer mismanaged the budget and had to cut corners at the end of the project.

*The Designer was just an intern.

*The Designer was a consultant.

*The Designer lied about His qualifications when he applied for the job.

*The Designer got the job because He sucked up to the boss.

*The whole design process was outsourced to cheap offshore labor.

*There was no single Designer. What you see is clearly the result of Design by Committee.

*The Designer was a spoiled child (thanks RH) and the universe is just a model He has long since abandoned in a chest full of broken toys.

Where Intelligent Design Falls Short

Intelligent Design is a lot like that fellow in Plato's cave. It sees the shadow, and mistakes it for the Light. Take for example, this video, which we found by way of Crooks & Liars, especially the section from 5:35 to 6:02, in which the co-host, one Ray Comfort, patiently explains how the existence of a building proves the existence of a builder.

Well, yes, the building is proof that there was a builder. Duh. The question is, what does the design of the building say about the builder? Granted, during this segment the video shows architectural designs for the Chrysler Building in New York, whose elegance certainly speaks well for its designer. But what about other buildings, for example the one shown here?



This building is proof that not only was there a builder, but this builder was a greedy charlatan who made no effort whatsoever to construct a thing of beauty or elegance. Haphazard design; haphazard designer.

Haphazard Studies has clearly demonstrated that, except for rare aberrations, the universe consistently betrays a Haphazard Design. How else do you explain George W. Bush?

Welcome

This blog is dedicated to Haphazardry and the Theory of Haphazard Design. The Theory of Haphazard Design (HD) states that, rather than being the result of physics and evolution, our universe and life as we know it are the products of a conscious design, but one that was haphazard at best.

The Theory Haphazard Design is rooted in Theory of Intelligent Design. But although HD shares some of the fundamental tenets of intelligent Design, proponents of HD believe that intelligence alone is not sufficient to explain the origins of the universe. After all, even a genius can do a lousy job of something. HD holds that the carelessness and negligence of the original designer(s) is the best explanation for all that we observe and experience.

The discipline of Haphazardry, also known as Haphazard Studies, has several branches. Observational Haphazardry focuses on discovering and enumerating evidence of HD in physical phenomena. Biological Haphazardry is centered around the the Theory of Haphazard Selection. Cultural Haphazardry is concerned with behavioral and psychological manifestations of Haphazardry. Theoretical Haphazardry attempts to develop explanations for why the design was so haphazard in the first place.

In coming posts, we hope to provide a grounding in the fundamentals of Haphazardry, as well as bringing you the most exciting and compelling developments in Haphazard scholarship.