design argument

• the design argument is also known as the teleological argument
• the design argument was derived by William Paley in 1802
• Paley's argument is based on 3 particular observations about the world:

  • complexity
  • regularity
  • purpose
• Paley's argument is a posteriori, inductive + analogical
• the design argument seeks to show that we can perceive evidence of deliberate design in the natural world
• Paley's watch analogy is as follows:

  • a watch has complex parts, each with a function + purpose
  • so the watch must have been designed by a watchmaker
  • the universe has parts that function together for a purpose
  • so the universe must've been designed by a universe maker
  • the universe maker is God
• examples of design in the world:

  • the eye - adapted for vision
  • fins + gills of fish - perfect for living in water
  • birds' bones, wings + feathers - perfect for flight
  • regularity in the universe of planetary orbits + seasons
• some strengths of the argument:

  • 'God' is the simplest explanation
  • evil may be unavoidable to bring about good
  • metaphysical + transcendent designer seems plausible
• some weaknesses of the argument:

  • God is a greater cause than needed for the universe
  • too much evil in the world
  • we have no experience of universe-making - we don't know what it would take
  • universal order could happen by chance
  • nature could design itself without a need for God
• the design argument cannot offer proof of God:

  • only deductive arguments can offer absolute proof - the design argument is inductive
  • Paley's observations that support his argument can be explained naturally e.g. planetary orbits are due to gravity
• the design argument does offer proof of God:

  • most things we accept as true in life are based on inductive arguments
  • the laws of nature require explanation - challenges do not diminish the probability that Paley's argument is true
• Paley's argument IS valuable for religious faith:

  • his argument is rationally + empirically based
  • it is consistent with biblical teaching that there is a guiding hand directing the whole of nature + human lives in a purposeful way
  • theists cannot prove God's existence, but nor can atheists prove God's non-existence
• Paley's argument IS NOT valuable for religious faith:

  • has no value for fideists as it is a rational argument
  • does not successfully address the issue of evil