The Design Argument - as Level Essay examples

and to do it to the best of their abilities. This also leads on to the

William Paley and David Hume’s argument over God’s existence is known as the teleological argument, or the argument from design. Arguments from design are arguments concerning God or some type of creator’s existence based on the ideas of order or purpose in universe. Hume takes on the approach of arguing against the argument of design, while Paley argues for it. Although Hume and Paley both provide very strong arguments, a conclusion will be drawn at the end to distinguish which philosophiser holds a stronger position. Throughout this essay I will be examining arguments with reference to their work from Paley’s “The Watch and the Watchmaker” and Hume’s “The Critique of the Teleological Argument”.

Of the three theistic arguments presented by the text, I find the “design”, or the teleological argument to be the most persuasive because unlike the other two arguments (ontological and first cause), the argument’s premises can be supported through observations of the physical world. The ontological and first cause argument are both more based in pure logic and reasoning, and they also can both be easily challenged for the same reason. On the other hand, the design argument focuses less on how the existence of God could be explained in the terms of a “catalyst”, and more how there is a statistically improbable amount of order in our universe (called Maximally Orderly Huge Universe”). Put simply, the design argument states that since there

During the 1800th century, William Paley, an English philosopher of religion and ethics, wrote the essay The Argument from Design. In The Argument from Design, Paley tries to prove the existence of a supreme being through the development of a special kind of argument known as the teleological argument. The teleological argument is argument by analogy, an argument based on the similarities between two different subjects. This essay purposefully attempts to break down Paley’s argument and does so in the following manner: firstly, Paley’s basis for the teleological argument is introduced; secondly, Paley’s argument is derived and analyzed; thirdly, the connection between Paley’s argument and the existence of a supreme being is made; and

The first version of the Design argument came from Plato, a Greek philosopher, who developed it to address the universe's apparent order. Plato proposed in his book Timaeus that a “demiurge”, a divine being of supreme wisdom and intelligence, was the creator of the

In his discussion of the argument from design, which he links with teleological principles, the author refers to the concept of design in a way that alludes to the conviction that there are certain divine manifestations in the world that are so perfect that they must revolve around a grand architect who conceived them to be that way. Therefore, he says that proving such an argument requires "indisputable examples of design or purpose" (McCloskey, 1968, p. 64). However, this standard of indisputability that McCloskey is holding this argument to,

William Paley’s teleological argument (also known as the argument from design) is an attempt to prove the existence of god. This argument succeeds in proving that while existence was created by an aggregation of forces, to define these forces, as a conscious, rational, and ultimately godlike is dubious. Although the conclusions are valid, the argument makes several logical errors. The teleological argument relies on inductive reasoning, rendering the argument itself valid, but unsound. The argument fails to apply its own line of reasoning to itself, resulting in infinite regression. Beyond the scope of its logical flaws, the arguments content lacks accurate comparisons. The argument hinges on a

the parts were fitted in a random order it would not work. The same as

The fact that in order to foster the formation of intelligent life, such a specific and precise chain of events had to happen is in itself mind-blowing. For that to happen randomly, and by itself, is so improbable that many use this as a basis for the argument for an omnipotent Creator. For example, when describing the overall makeup of the universe, theoretical physicist and popular science writer Paul Davies, declared, “the impression of design is overwhelming" (Davies, 1988, p. 203). Philosopher Robin Collins argues that the fine-tuning of the universe is more probably explained by design than random chance of a single universe exhibiting all the parameters needed to foster intelligent life. He uses the analogy of people traveling to Mars and finding a domed structure perfectly set up for life to exist. The people would not conclude this biosphere happened to form by chance, but rather they would presume that it was designed by some intelligent being. Of course it is possible that the biosphere was formed by a natural process, however unlikely. The most plausible explanation in this scenario is that it was designed to be that

The theory of intelligent design theory holds that an intelligent cause and not an indirect process best explain the nature of living things and the universal features. The theory appreciates that, for the existence of the universe and the living things in it, there must have been in existence an intelligent force. The theorist are not out to show proof of the intelligent designer or who the intelligent designer ought to be. Intelligent designers make an observation and subsequent inferences on intelligent agent's actions and the resultants complexities. The inferences and observations are accessed against information obtained in the natural process concluding life is an intelligent design ADDIN EN.CITE Dawes200748067(Dawes 67)48048017Dawes, Gregory W.What Is Wrong with Intelligent Design?International Journal for Philosophy of ReligionInternational Journal for Philosophy of Religion69-816122007Springer( HYPERLINK l "_ENREF_2" o "Dawes, 2007 #480" Dawes 67).

The argument of design isn’t about the question of God’s existence but about the answer to the nature of God. The Design argument, also known as “a posteriori”, is to prove the existence of God who has the characteristics of being all- powerful, all- knowing and benevolent.The intelligent design is about observations and coming to conclusions which try to prove the natural world is created by an intelligent being. An analogy was presented between human artifacts and nature to determine that the creator of this natural world must be intelligent.

The constantly mounting collection of evidence for evolution by natural selection is almost impossible to ignore. However, there is a neo-creationist school of thought, called "intelligent design," attempting to modernize the concept of a God to fit the challenge

He argues that, while the probability of life is extremely small, “the probability of every occurrence in the universe is also extremely small” (271). Nevertheless, we do not see the need for design in every event. Therefore, Smith believes, we do not need design for life either. Once again, Smith fails to recognize the nature of the fine-tuning argument as an inference to the best explanation. The fine-tuning argument does not suggest that design is absolutely necessary for life, it only holds that it is far more probable that design led to life than chance did. The quote that Smith refers to from Stace (which describes the man killed by a tile from a roof) holds that “we do not find it necessary to suppose that someone threw the tile down from the roof on purpose. We are quite satisfied to attribute the event to… the operation of natural forces” (271). Stace is absolutely right, it is not necessary to suppose that someone threw the tile down; however, some would argue that it is much more probable that the tile was thrown (that there was design), given the fact that the tile happened to fall at the exact moment and in the exact place in which the man was walking past. In the same way, while it is not necessary to believe life arose by design, and many, such as Smith, are satisfied attributing life to chance, it is far more probable that life arose by

Throughout the course of this essay we shall examine two of the major philosophical arguments for the existence of God. The arguments that we are going to focus on shall be the Design argument and the Ontological argument. We shall compare, evaluate and discuss both the Design (or teleological) argument for the existence of God and the Ontological Argument for the existence of God, as well as highlighting philosophical criticisms of both theories too. By doing so, we shall attempt to draw a satisfactory conclusion and aim gain a greater understanding of the respective theories and their criticisms of each theory.

The argument for intelligent design has been muddled over for years by philosophers and as such three main arguments for intelligent design have been proposed. The first argument in favour of Intelligent Design being the Fine-Tuning argument which states that the universe is set up so perfectly for life to exist based on the precise union of various constants, laws and conditions that make it possible for intelligent life to exist and that even the slightest shift in these constants would result in a universe that could no longer sustain intelligent life. This phenomenon is referred to as the Goldilocks enigma, because of