um
i. In that case, I'm not familiar with ID arguments in their best form; I'd be grateful if you could give me some pointers, links, or summaries, 'cos it's something that I'm vaguely interested in. [as an aside: I'd forgotten about *that* feature of the eye until yesterday. I found the page interesting on its own merits, anyhow]
ii. re: Plantinga's argument
Evolution has no necessary reason to sponsor a drive for truth in humans.
Well, that's half true, and half completely wrong. On the one hand, it has reason to sponsor a drive for truth insofar as there is an advantage to be conferred by having one's beliefs match the world (it's that famed 'mind-to-world' direction of fit again). On the other, there are many instances where we simply don't seek the truth: for instance, if we had a full set of true beliefs regarding what our friends were saying about us, this would seriously damage our social lives. It's a generalisation, but a true one. There are some cases where having false beliefs actually helps; even deceiving ourselves confers evolutionary benefits, on occasion (how best to deliver a convincing lie? etc.). So I'm not sure that considerations of evolutionary pressures as concerns truth-seeking entail anything at all.
(incidentally, are you a philosophy student? if so, or if not, and if you're still in St Andrews, I'm here until Monday if you - or anyone else - would care for a pint)