This is how I use it in debates where intelligent design proponents will on top of the complexity argument tend to use examples of how fantastic everything is as evidence of design. A blatant example of something that seems so in your face obviously flawed tends to throw them.
It's also useful because the complexity of the eye is often used as an argument for ID on the assumption that an incomplete eye would be useless, but for the eye we do have a long range of intermediate stages that would provide useful levels of sight, and we can show a long range of variations over eyes in existing organisms.
It's also useful because the complexity of the eye is often used as an argument for ID on the assumption that an incomplete eye would be useless, but for the eye we do have a long range of intermediate stages that would provide useful levels of sight, and we can show a long range of variations over eyes in existing organisms.