As Paley explains, just as the function and complexity of a watch implies a watchmaker, so likewise the function and complexity of the universe implies the existence of a universe-maker. I will examine the argument presented by William Paley, in which he offers an argument from design that claims to show a clear reason why one should believe in God, due to the natural features of the world. I disagree with Paley in that there are many flaws to his argument. In my opinion Paley's argument is a deductive argument, in the sense that he first establishes a belief and uses it in order to reach his final conclusion, hence a deductive argument in which Paley’s premises might be somewhat true but his conclusion is false. .
Explain Paley’s version of the teleological argument (25) The teleological argument, or the design argument, is an argument to prove the existence of God, it is an A Posteriori argument which attempts to show that the design, order, complexity and purpose of the universe imply the existence of a God who gives the world such characteristics. The design argument follows the logical pattern that when we see things that are manmade, which are in an ordered pattern, or are particularly beautiful, complex or which work well then we must infer that they have been created that way by an intelligent designer. We must see that these things do not arise by chance, therefore when we look at the natural world and see that there is order, beauty, complexity and purpose we can see that the natural world closely resembles human inventions and therefore must also have and intelligent designer. The only thing that is powerful enough to design something as complex as the universe must be God. Therefore, God exists.
Paley then used his theory on the world. He said that the universe was not an accident and therefore must also have a designer. As the universe has such an intricate design, for example the position he earth is from the sun is so exact that the universe mist have an intelligent designer; God. Paley believed it must have been God because he is omnipotent and is therefore powerful enough to create the world and the complexity it contains. Paley believed that no one else would have been intelligent enough to create the order and complexity of the universe.
Theist Stannard and Paley both start their arguments with the premise, that the universe has complex features, but Stannard proceed further the idea, that the universe is too complex to just happen by coincidence. Paley argues with his watch Analogy and if we would walk pass a watch we would assert that it was designed by an intelligent designer. For him and Stannard the only probable explanation for the universe’ existence is God. Paley maintains that everything which exhibits his 6 features of design, has to be designed by an intelligent designer. Both, the universe and a watch have several parts, these parts work together for a purpose, they are made with a specific material, the parts produce together regulated motion and if any part would be different, this motion wouldn’t be produced.
With this premise, Pareley introduces the connection between the watch and our universe. He explains clearly that if a watch needs a designer, surely the universe should need one to. He justifies the existence of God through this watch argument, so he proceed with this argument from analogy: our world is like a watch, and watches require watchmakers, so our world must have an intelligent "watchmaker" as well namely, God. In the other hand David Hume has objections about this argument, one of the objections who really caught my eye was when he said that God is not perfect which is contradictory to the nature of God. (Since he derived a contradiction from the premise, the premise itself must be false).
‘We see examples of design throughout the natural world and conclude that an intelligent designer is clearly demonstrated.’- Assess whether this argument succeeds. Because of the complex nature of the world and the ability of things to fill such a specific purpose, we can conclude that this cannot be merely coincidence. We can infer that an intelligent designer such as God has created the universes and everything in them because of this. I will seek to prove that this argument does not succeed and that there are in fact alternative explanations for what a theist would see as ‘intelligent design’. The design argument was formulated by Paley.
In this paper I will examine and evaluate Cleanthes’s argument from design to the existence of God. I argue that although I begin by examine Cleathes’s argument from design to the existence of God. Cleanthes, a character introduced by David Hume in his Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, tries to argue that the Universe was created by a designer, presumably God. According to Dan’s analysis at discussion, Cleanthes’s argument takes the following form: “ Premise 1 – The Universe resembles an artifact because: i) It shows a high level of complexity and ii) It has degree of apparently purposive organization Premise 2 – Artifacts are created by designers. Therefore, the Universe was created by a designer.
Explain Paley’s Teleological Argument (AO1 25marks) Firstly, Telos is the Greek word for end or result of some course of action. Therefore, The Teleological Argument looks to demonstrate the existence of God by looking at the universe and trying to demonstrate that is has been designed for some reason or purpose. Evidence of design within the universe leads to the question, if the universe has been designed, who or what designed it? Furthermore, The Teleological Argument aims to demonstrate that the designer of the universe is God. The Teleological Argument is also an example of an a posteriori argument which means that it’s a synthetic argument that reaches conclusions based on evidence observed.
In it, he wrote that if a pocket watch is found on the ground, it seems logical to assume that someone dropped it and that it was made by one or more watchmakers, and not by natural forces. He therefore argued just as the function and complexity of a watch implies a watch-maker, so likewise the function and complexity of the universe implies the existence of a universe-maker. Paley went on to argue that the complex structures of living things and the remarkable adaptations of plants and animals required an intelligent designer. An intelligent designer, sometimes referred to as an intelligent agent is “the hypothetical willed and self-aware entity that the intelligent design movement argues had some role in the origin and/or development of life.” He believed the natural world was the creation of God and showed the nature of the creator. 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).
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’.