Explain Paley’s version of the design argument and Darwinist objections to it. William Paley used an analogy of a watch to put across his argument for the Teleological argument, which he wrote in Natural Theology. He wrote about an old fashioned watch, that uses cogs, wheels and springs, with the point that such a watch of that design must have had a designer, so that means that because, like a clockwork watch, the universe is complex, so it must also have a designer. Another example is, if someone found a camera. Paley would suggest that to argue that the camera happened by accident is nonsense.
a) Give an account of the fundamental ideas of the design argument for the existence of God (21 marks) The design argument for the existence of God is also called the teleological argument. The design argument is based on observation on the obvious order in the natural world, to conclude that it’s the result of design not just by chance. The evidence from design indicates that there is a designer and the argument concludes that this designer is God. ‘With such signs of forethought in the design of living creatures, can you doubt they are the work of choice or design?’ Socrates. The design argument is based on the view that the universe has order, purpose and regularity.
The design argument was formulated by Paley. His watch analogy is an a posteriori argument which gives empirical evidence the structure is that it explains that the existence of God is the best explanation for the evidence available. His argument says that the world and everything in it are so intricate and complex that they must have been designed. He goes on the mention that if he found a watch lying on the ground he would take from it that there must have been a designer due to the organisation of parts put together for a purpose so even if we had no previous knowledge of watchers or makers we would look at all of the small pieces that make up a watch, arranged in a specific way meaning they fulfil the purpose of telling the time and all of those pieces could not have fallen together so therefore must have been designed. This is an analogy of things in the natural world for example, the human eye is made of small parts working together to create the purpose of sight, we infer this must be the result of design not chance.
You would not assume that it was made due to random changes in nature; you would think that the watch had a designer. Because it has a purpose (to tell the time) it must have a designer. As the universe also has signs of complexity and intelligence, it too must have a designer? The watch is an unintelligent being in the case, with the designer being the intelligence. If we use analogy to compare the watch to the universe then there must be some intelligent being which directs all unintelligent beings towards their end.
According to Paley, God had carefully designed "even the most humble and insignificant organisms" and all of their minute features (such as the wings and antennae of earwigs). He believed therefore that God must care even more for humanity. Paley recognised that there is great suffering in nature, and that nature appears to be indifferent to pain. His way of reconciling this with his belief in a benevolent God was to assume that life had more pleasure than pain. The watch analogy is a teleological argument, meaning it is an a posteriori (after experience) argument for the existence of God based on apparent design and purpose in the universe.
For Anselm, God cannot not exist. Descartes supported Anselm in his book ‘meditations’ and developed Anselm’s argument particularly in terms of necessary being. He based his argument for God’s existence on the idea that God is a ‘supremely perfect being’. Descartes believed that we can conclude that God exists, because existence is a predicate of a perfect being; therefore God must exist to avoid being self contradictory.
If the teleological argument is correct in saying that God created humans like a machine, then you would expect humans to be perfect creations, but we are not. Humans are flawed in many ways including the fact that we have extra organs, and that our skeletons are not created properly for the way we walk. Humans are not machines in any way, and the fact that we are not perfect machines is explained by the theory of evolution. Therefore the theory of evolution is proof against the teleological argument and that God is the creator of the human race and the earth. I feel that this argument fails to prove the existence of God.
The ultimate law is Eternal Law. These are the principles by which God made and controls the universe which only God can understand completely. We can have a partial understanding of these laws through ‘reflections’. Aquinas argued that we can understand these laws more by using human reason. He was influenced by Aristotle’s view that humans, like all objects in this realm, have a specific purpose.
The design argument (DA) starts from the observations about the world from there towards the conclusion that God exists. This argument appeals to the world as proof of Gods existence and therefore relies on our experiences. The DA is a posteriori argument for the existence of God; it seeks to prove that there is evidence for a designer in the world and used external imperial evidence as its proof. It is an inductive argument, which means it’s based on experience and the most probable explanation. William Paley is a classical contributor to the DA and like St. Aquinas he believed that the world is too complex and well ordered to have happened by chance therefore it must have designed by a greater being, ‘God’.
William Paley’s argument William Paley’s design argument is the idea of purpose or chance. Paley argues for purpose. He believes that the order, beauty and complexity of this world could not be blind chance and therefore must have a purpose. Paley believes that for everything to work so intricately together there must be a divine intelligence ordering it; A creator. He believed this creator to be God.