I hope that Mr. Dawkins himself can help me with this dilemma. I have spent a substantial amount of time pondering the Intelligent Design and Evolution concepts to try to form my own world view and (perhaps naively) hope to discover some real truth.
The one thing that I have always found curious about this discussion is that we consider Intelligent Design and Evolution mutually exclusive. We make them adversaries and the basis of many arguments and belief factions, if you will.
I don't see it that way. You could argue that Intelligent Design more closely resembles organized religious beliefs. It is very clear that human beings did not rise up 6000 years ago when the whole world came into existence, if we are to take a literal interpretation of the Bible.
However, in philosophy, we have the Cosmological argument. We have the notion that there seems like there should be an uncaused cause because how else do you explain the origin of the universe?
Let us imagine for a moment that there is such an uncaused cause and that it is infinitely more powerful and intelligent than we can possibly imagine. Let us also imagine that it may also transcend time, that is, have no beginning and no end, the Alpha and the Omega or the Ouroboros or that which is represented in Escher's Drawing Hands. That perhaps it exists outside of this system and thus is not limited by the constraints of the one we are all members of.
Why couldn't this "thing" create this system and with it all of the characteristics, rules and properties that would give rise to Evolution, Natural Selection and all of the other observations of the properties of this system that we refer to as science? In essence, why isn't Evolution, Natural Selection and all other aspects of the universe the creation of "it."
I respectfully and humbly submit this question for your consideration. It is not my intent to prove or disprove anything. I only seek real truth and knowledge.