Paley's Argument For Intelligent Design

In his third argument about arguing from mind to design, he states that using the mind as a representation is only a small part of universe (Paley, 1802, 197). For example, a watch must have had a watchmaker because such a complex idea and mechanism could not have just come from nature. A creator with prior knowledge of the watch must have created it. Therefore, the universe must have had a creator. This creator was God.

This essay will not review all of the objections as this would result in overlap and repetition. The Argument from Design argues that the universe was designed by an intelligent designer, God and no further evidence is required to prove their existence. It compares Items in nature

In the Theological Argument William Paley is trying to prove that god exists. He uses the analogy of creation and design. He believes that because a watch has a maker/creator so does the universe. Paley then goes into depth of how complicated, precise and intelligent a human has to be in order to create the watch. He then explains all the steps and components it takes in order for the watch to be able to function. By doing so he is showing how precise the creator had to be in order for the watch to work and he uses this analogy for the universe. For instance, having the sun exactly where it is at the perfect distance in order to support human life on Earth. As the argument continues Paley starts to give reasons as to why people might consider

Supporters within the teleological arguement like to use Paley's watch arguement as justifaction for an intellgent design. However, there's a fault in this arguemtent. Paley's view and example of a watch show funtionlaity with all the pieces of the watch falling together from that of a man made object. Paley's view and that of supporters of the teleological argrumnet lack the complex nature of the Earth. A watch is a single mechansim that with careful design works to tell time. The Earth doesn't have these parts, it has adaptation and many more factors at play rather than a designers intent. David Hume's quote comparing the Earth to a plant is much more accurate on the way the world works. The Earth like a plant takes time to grow and it can easily be altered if the contitions are off to nurture the life it contains. There is no functionalty or purpose for Earth only that it exists. If a god created the Earth then they would of created a world that would be stable and perfect order. Instead we have a world that is a mixture of different ecosyetmes and possibilites for both creation and

Even if people were unaware of the person who made the watch, ignorance is not an excuse for not giving credit to the artist. An objection to his argument is that some of the parts seem to have no function, so they were not designed. Paley states there may be a function of these parts that we are unable to see or understand. The design is evident from examining the rest of the watch. The machine does not have to be perfect in order to understand the artist’s design of the mechanism.

My argument and ideas are based on parts of Thomas Aquinas and William Paley’s arguments on the existence of God. As a Christian, at some point in time you wonder or start to question religion. Does God exist? I feel as though this is a natural question people ask through their personal spiritual journeys. The existence of God is provided by the premises of a first mover, a first causer, the proof of possibility and necessity, and God being the designer of the universe, therefore God exists. The natural world must have had a maker. Genesis 1:1 says, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” I wonder if God made the universe, who made God? God is the transcendent personal cause of the universe, exists independently, there is no beginning. Therefore, nothing caused God.

The teleological arguments talk about the existence of the universe, which is based from telos which means purpose or end. There is a great chance that the universe was created by a smart, brilliant trying to accomplish a purpose. In our readings, and our classes discussion we have read a lot about the teleological argument for the existence of god, our readings mentioned about William Paley, and it said that William Paley compared the universe to a watch, which has many parts that can work together that can create a purpose of the universe. Aside from the universe, and the design there is another intelligent being and that person us called God. This argument, is a form of an

And, since two of the three criteria are met, we can then assume that there is a creator. We live in a world uniquely equipped to support mankind. There is only one explanation for this and that is that the world was designed by an intelligent creator. This omni-god must have had humans in mind when he created the world. (Holt) And, since everything we need is here on earth, it could not possibly be here by chance. There was no random selection or chance that just happened to serve all of our needs. Paley explains that it is perfectly logical to make the leap from watchmaker to omni-God. With concepts so complex as those found in nature, there is no doubt that they required a creator. There is no need to question anything that Paley asserts in his analogy between the watch and the world.

This argument contends that an intelligent designer of the world does exist, and structured the universe so that most natural things fit together for a clear purpose. We can recognize that things in nature seem to be made for specific reasons that are too fortunate to be accidental. For instance, we observe that giraffes have extremely long necks and conveniently eat from the tops of trees. We can also identify that planet earth is just the right distance from the sun and moon to sustain human life. If either of these things were less ideal, there would be drastically worse outcomes for the giraffes and humans on earth. The harmony we witness in nature compels the belief in an intelligent designer.

The theory of intelligent design theory holds that an intelligent cause and not an indirect process best explain the nature of living things and the universal features. The theory appreciates that, for the existence of the universe and the living things in it, there must have been in existence an intelligent force. The theorist are not out to show proof of the intelligent designer or who the intelligent designer ought to be. Intelligent designers make an observation and subsequent inferences on intelligent agent's actions and the resultants complexities. The inferences and observations are accessed against information obtained in the natural process concluding life is an intelligent design ADDIN EN.CITE Dawes200748067(Dawes 67)48048017Dawes, Gregory W.What Is Wrong with Intelligent Design?International Journal for Philosophy of ReligionInternational Journal for Philosophy of Religion69-816122007Springer( HYPERLINK l "_ENREF_2" o "Dawes, 2007 #480" Dawes 67).

Paley’s philosophical position for the existence of a deity can be summarized by the following statements. 1. Humans are made for a purpose. 2. If humans are made for a purpose, then there must be a creator behind that purpose. 3. Therefore, there is a creator. (1, 2, 3 MP) His reasoning for this is by comparing humans as a whole to a machine. Just like a watch, which has intricate parts that work for a grander design of telling time, so too does the eye for seeing (Feldman, 1994). The watch, Paley argues could not possibly have just came into being to fulfill the specific purpose which it presently does. According to Feldman (1994), this still points to a creator who designed its purpose and knew of its function. Even if it replicated itself

Theologians tend to take ideas from arguments like historical and philosophical i.e the Cosmological argument to be able to support or criticise a range of religious matters. Theology enables theologians to realise their own beliefs along with others, to come up with contrasts between different religions etc. Religion’s aim is to, enable people to live morally and to believe in God as, “it was he who had created us and to him we shall return”. Paley uses his watch analogy to explain to atheists that, God exists because to say that a watch has a

Paley’s Natural Theology argues that in order for something to exist, there has to be a creator. A well-known passage from his book includes someone noticing a watch on the ground and anyone would assume that the watch was made by someone else. He connects this to the creation of life and everything we know, to God’s creations. That God made humans and everything else in this world, maybe as explained in the Biblical text of Genesis. According to Paley, God is our benevolent creator, but what if everything existed before hand and God had nothing to do with it? It is hard to tell what is true, following Paley and Christianity or the idea of true science and evolution.

Additionally, several arguments exist in order to justify theism, including the argument from design and the ontological, cosmological, moral arguments. Taking logical, empirical, and moral considerations into thought, the philosophical justification of theism holds; yet there are corresponding rebuttals that raise skepticism within my scientific self. For example, in The Analogy of the Watch by William Paley, a hypothetical situation arises in which one finds a pocket watch in the middle of the woods-- upon its discovery, one would figure that the laws

The problem is one of choosing the correct analogy. He pointed out that the universe more resembles a living organism than a mechanical watch -- which indicates that the universe must have started as a fetus in a cosmic womb! Other scholars also lampooned Paley's argument; Voltaire argued that noses must have been designed to hold up glasses, and that bunny rabbits must have been given white tails so they could be easier to shoot. The idea of design was so thoroughly and effectively ridiculed that theologians of the time actually stopped using it as an argument, although, curiously enough, it would resurface in the 20th century.