UNIT 1 Challenges

• Validity

  The strength or soundness of an argument
• "Who designed the designer?": 'Weak criticism'
• Occam's Razor

  ENTITIES SHOULD NOT BE MULTIPLIED UNNECESSARILY
• If you have more than one explanation to choose from, the best explanation is the simplest one
• Complex explanations often bring in extra ideas, new concepts or expect us to believe in new things
• Simple explanations work with what we already know and avoid proposing anything new or untested
• Occam's Razor can be used to criticise the Design Argument

  Because faced with something that needs explaining (order and complexity in the universe), the Design Argument brings in something else that needs explaining - an all-powerful Designer God
• This is "multiplying entities unnecessarily" and goes against Occam's Razor
• If God is simple

  Occam's Razor actually supports God as the best explanation
• If God is not simple

  Occam's Razor is devastating for the Design Argument
• Soundness

  The claim premises of the argument are factually true
• The universe only shows the appearance of design, not actual design
• The Theory of Evolution is an alternative interpretation of apparent design in living things
• Apparent design in chemistry and physics may also have a naturalistic, rather than a supernatural, explanation
• "Design is always the product of an intelligent agent" is challenged by evolution
• This links to Occam's Razor

  Suggesting that, however improbable it is for design to come about through unintelligent causes, an explanation like "God" may be even more improbable
• Dysteleological argument


  Rejecting the Design Argument by pointing out the flaws and imperfections in the natural world
• The natural world suggests its Designer must be incompetent or evil, instead of showing signs of an all-wise, all-powerful and benevolent Designer God