Summary: The Argument Of Design

A design argument is more commonly know as a Teleological one, which is an argument for the existence of a creator or god “based on perceived evidence of deliberate design in the natural or physical world”.The argument has been discussed all the way back to the time of Socrates and Plato. In my essay I will be evaluating one argument put forward by a famous philosopher, in this case William Paley, an English clergyman born in 1743, in which he tries to show similarities in the design of nature and the design of man made artefacts.

Take a moment to think about the world around you and all of its beauty. From the ever flowing Mississippi River, to the ledges of the mighty Grand Canyon, or even to the peak of Mt. Fuji there is an immense amount of things on this Earth that are so incredible it is hard to believe science and chance created these magnificent things. So what is the best explanation for these occurrences? I believe that these occurrences scream of an intelligent designer which also leads us to the existence of God. First I must explain what an argument for design is and then we will look at Paley’s Watchmaker Theory to give us better insight on this argument. Then I will point

Some, such as Paley, aimed to defend this idea using teleological arguments. Such arguments insist on the existence of God by “attempting to identify features of the world that constitute evidence of intelligent design and inferring God’s existence as the best explanation for these features.” Paley compares a watch to living organisms by analogizing: “Watches are complex and good at doing their job (i.e. keeping time). Therefore, it is a result of intelligent design. Living organisms are complex and good at doing their job (i.e. surviving and reproducing). Therefore, they are a result of intelligent design.” Paley believes that if a watchmaker made a watch, then an intelligent designer made other elaborate things, such as the eye or flowers. A problem with this reasoning is that analogies are comparisons, not evidence. Comparing two not identical, but similar things does not make their conclusions equivalent; if one conclusion is true for one argument, it is not guaranteed to be true for the other. In this situation, concluding that a watch has an intelligent designer does not validate the notion that living organisms do as well. In rebuttal, theists attempt to thwart this with the theory of irreducible complexity, or the belief that some traits are too complex to have been produced by evolution’s slow step-by-step process. Similar to the watch, theists believe life is too complex to have been affected by evolution, and the best explanation for living organisms is that they are a result of intelligent

The Design Argument The name teleological is derived from the Greek word ‘telos’ meaning ‘end’ or

The design argument is also referred to at the Teleological Argument stemmed from the Greek work ‘Telos’ meaning end or purpose. It is an ‘A posterior’ argument (from experience) based on our empirical senses and it is synthetic meaning that it is from observation. The argument is also inductive meaning there a number of possible conclusions. The main basis of the Teleological argument is based on a designer commonly known as ‘the classical God of theism’ (hereafter referred to as God)

and to do it to the best of their abilities. This also leads on to the

There is no objective evidence to demonstrate the existence of nature’s creator. If we were to think the design argument was reasonable, then one must also take under consideration the amount of ‘creators’ are required

Evolution is the development of life and aims to answer how diversity is possible here on earth. It provides scientific reasons on why we see similarities amongst creatures under the same species but is has in no way stated that God does not exist because of this. So it is very wrong to assume that the evolution contradicts design actually it further supports design. Evolution believes that inside every living creature lies a genetic code, DNA structure which contains the genetic make-up of things. This has been passed on from one generation to another and can only be altered on extreme conditions which entail survival. Does he not see design in this process? Does he not see the design towards perfection within the DNA structure of creatures? But of course, these are simply assumptions if I am to accept evolution but in as much as I have not accepted evolution; the scientific community has also rejected this because it lacks sufficient evidence.

Based on my interpretation of William Paley’s The Argument from Design, it sounds as though Darwin’s objection to the argument is invalid from the start. Darwin’s objection says that there doesn’t necessarily need to be a designer, creation could happen by chance through evolution or mutation. While the latter part of his argument is completely valid; things can be created through evolution and mutation, the problem with his argument is that there would still have to be a reason that the former being evolved or mutated. Some kind of event would have had to of taken place in order to spark the change in that being. Paley’s argument primarily uses a watch as his example, explaining that it was

Dawkins, Richard. The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design. New York: W.W. Norton, 1986.

During the 1800th century, William Paley, an English philosopher of religion and ethics, wrote the essay The Argument from Design. In The Argument from Design, Paley tries to prove the existence of a supreme being through the development of a special kind of argument known as the teleological argument. The teleological argument is argument by analogy, an argument based on the similarities between two different subjects. This essay purposefully attempts to break down Paley’s argument and does so in the following manner: firstly, Paley’s basis for the teleological argument is introduced; secondly, Paley’s argument is derived and analyzed; thirdly, the connection between Paley’s argument and the existence of a supreme being is made; and

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).

b, The idea that God exists and that he is the architect to serve the

In his discussion of the argument from design, which he links with teleological principles, the author refers to the concept of design in a way that alludes to the conviction that there are certain divine manifestations in the world that are so perfect that they must revolve around a grand architect who conceived them to be that way. Therefore, he says that proving such an argument requires "indisputable examples of design or purpose" (McCloskey, 1968, p. 64). However, this standard of indisputability that McCloskey is holding this argument to,

This chapter was consumed of arguments trying to answer how the universe was created, is there a god, and is god the one who created the world we live in and everything it offers, and what if god wasn’t the creature of the universe, does god exist at all? The argument of design stated that everything had to have been created by an intelligent designer. It argued that earths wonderful features could not have just happed out of the blue, they had to have had an intelligent designer, they had to have been created by god. The Best-Explanation Argument stated that intelligent design was much more reliable than pure chance. The Same- Evidence Argument stated that the universe is made up of parts that work together to accomplish something, so we can conclude that the universe was created by an intelligent designer. The Natural selection theory was