Richard Dawkin's big blunder

[Heywood]

If it is "good enough", it is contained in the set of targets evolution homes in on.

Which would leave you with the concept that every species that exists, has existed, and will exist is a target. Kinda makes the whole concept of a target useless and practically infinite.

You are incorrect.

A target could consist of the complete set of all possibilities....like the random sentence in Dawkins' example. Or it could be a very small subset of all possibilities....like the specific sentence from Dawkins' example. Or it could contain any number of possibilities. Convergent evolution suggests that in natural evolution the size of the targets is relatively small.