Similarly, William Paley, strongly believed that the observation of the intricate complexity of the universe concludes that there must be a creator. Paley believed that this creator was God. In ‘Natural Theology’, he used the analogy of the watch to his ideas. He explained that if you came across an intricately designed watch, you could conclude that watch was not made by chance and was designed with purpose and placed there. For Paley, the different parts of watch work perfectly together to fulfil a purpose.
What is it about theories in the natural and human science that make them convincing? A theory is a supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain an idea or occurrence. In the fields of natural and human science, there are many theories that have been declared by experts, in order to explain random occurrences and patterns. Any expert can publish a theory on a specific concept, but in order for that theory to be accepted by society first. This is where the convincing element of a thesis and theory should be very persuasive and eminent.
Examine the strengths and weaknesses of the design argument for the existence of God The design argument is also known as the teleological argument, which comes from the Greek ‘Telos’, meaning end or purpose. It is a posteriori, so is made after something had been experienced. In this case it’s the experience of the universe and its apparent design, and it argues that if the universe has a specific design then it therefore must have a designer. There are many philosophers, both proponents who are for the argument and critics who are against it, and so there are strengths and weaknesses of the argument. Empirical evidence is a strength of the teleological argument.
In short, it would have needed a designer. Thus, in the same way that a complex system such as a watch needs a designer, a system so near-infinitely complex as the world must have also had an intelligent designer – God. The analogy of the watch serves as an analogy for the world: it demonstrates purpose, design and telos. All parts of the watch unite to fulfill a purpose, this cannot be explained by chance. Paley’s argument is also based on regularity.
I do not completely agree with this because for God to have control of what ever mind perceives, he would have to be the creator of these minds. But we as rationale beings can decide when to create a new mind. “With regard to all other finite created spirits, it necessarily follows, that there is an omnipresent eternal mind, which knows and comprehends all things, and exhibits them to our view in such a manner, and according to such rules as he himself has ordained, and are by us termed the laws of nature.” (p. 64) Here Berkeley says that
The teleological argument, also known as the argument for design, is commonly known as an argument for God’s existence or the existence or an intelligent designer/creator, based on empirical evidence. William Paley was a British theologian who wrote in defence of theism (God) and Christianity, suggesting he was a Christian. He strongly believed that the earth had a creator and uses his analogy of the watch and the watchmaker as proof of this. Paley examined a watch and observed how the mechanics work, all the instruments within the watch fitted together to make the watch functional. He said that the watch couldn’t just appear on its own and start ticking; he said it must have had some sort of creator, the watchmaker.
In David Hume's Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, the author employs three fictional characters to discuss God's existence. Of these three characters, I will be discussing a conversation between Cleanthes, who argues God can be known through rational thought, and Philo, a philosophic skeptic. The main point I intend to discuss is the argument from design. The basic premise of this argument is that an intelligent designer made the Earth. When one observes the world and nature, it seems that everything has an intricate relationship and interconnectedness with everything else.
The most famous one was written by William Paley (1743-1805). He claimed that the complexity and efficiency of natural objects such as the eye, which is very complex and has a very important function, is evidence that God must have designed it. Paley says that just by looking at a watch we already know, subconsciously, that a watchmaker designed it. So when looking at the eye, why cannot we agree a maker designed it? This argument relies on the idea that a deigned object, a watch in our case, is very similar to the eye, which is a natural object.
Since triads correspond to physical structures and a logical system has been invented to deal with them, I conclude that a properly scientific account can be given of triadic phenomena. This scientific account will be part of a new triadic science and may not look much like the predominantly dyadic science we use today, such as sending things to Mars. The only real proof of this conclusion is to produce such a science, but it is my belief that we have plenty of reason to suspect that such a triadic science can be formulated. After all we are pretty clever at solving problems. As far as restoring God "to his rightful place in the universe" is concerned, I doubt that any amount of arguing, scientific or otherwise, will convince the skeptic or disuade the believer.
Why is “necessity” something that has to be considered, when considering the world’s construction and its nature (how it works or behaves)? “For this world came into being from a mixture of necessity and intelligence.” Necessity led most of the things in the universe to the best outcome because intelligence influenced it to do so. 4. What was the model for the creation of the world—the template used? Why is the physical (sensible) world inferior to the model it was based upon?