Design Argument

Question 1

describe the design argument

Answer 1

• Claims that the existence of design in nature - such as the complexity/order/purpose/functionality of living organisms can only be explained by the existence of the designer. This designer is therefore likely to be god
• A posteriori, teleological

Question 2

Describe how Paley used his analogy of a watch to explain this

Answer 2

• A watch has intricate parts and this is because it was designed for a purpose, whereas a stone doesn’t
• This therefore suggests the watch had a maker, who comphrehended its construction and designed its use
• In the same way, it is therefore probable that the universe is a product of intelligent design as it has purpose - therefore it is likely to be a powerful and vastly intelligent designer who designed the universe
• ‘like effects have like causes’
• ‘every manifestation of design that exists in the watch exists in nature’

Question 3

Describe Hume’s critique of Paley

Answer 3

1) If the universe WAS designed, there is no evidence that the designer was the God of classical theism - it could have been a lesser being. a cause must be proportional to its effect - and the existence of the universe is out of proportion to God. The designer could have been a metaphysical being, ro multiple (design is usually a feature of teamwork)
‘If we survey a ship, what exalted idea must we form of the ingenuity of the carpenter who formed so complicated a machine? And what surprise must we feel when we find him a stupid mechanic?’
2) The existence of evil suggests a limited designer: Epicurus’ inconsistent triad is still unanswered: ‘ is god willing but not able? then he is impotent. Is he able but ntoi willing? then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? then whence is evil?’.
3) analogies between the way the world works and the way machines work are unsound - the world is more like a vegetable, growing itself without the need for a designer. This is also supported by evolution - the universe designs itself without the need for god.
Dawkins supports this, arguing that Paley was ‘gloriously wrong’ - if there was a watchmaker it was evolution. The universe has no purpose, no designer, and no plan. Furthermore, if nature can design itself Hume is right to argue that the universe designed itself
4)Analogies between human designers and the designer of the universe are anthropomorphism - we have no experience of universe making, only of designing human machines, therefore we have no idea what it would be like to design the universe, or what the designer would be - Design is in our minds, not the world

Question 4

Strengths

Answer 4

1) Paley may be right to claim that the designer is the god of classical theism as this is the simplest explanation - Richard Swinburne claims that the existence of an all-powerful God is simpler and therefore better as ‘simplicity is always evidence for truth’
2) Paley argued that evil may be unavoidable in order for God to bring about good - the FWD means that we have the freedom to choose the highest order goods/evils therefore they must both exist. Furthermore, Hick’s soul making theodicy argues that: ‘without evil we could never learn to love the good’
3) Evolution does not destroy the design argument as evolution does not explain itself, and is also compatible with god
- Against Dawkins, Swinburne maintains that evolution explains nothing as it is regulated by unexplained laws of nature, and Swinburne argues that these laws were designed by god
4) Paley argues that the designer must be metaphysical - the designer must be transcendent/metaphysical as you cannot design this complex system from the inside
5) The argument is strengthened by the anthropic principle - points out 30 conditions which have to be fine tuned for an ordered universe containing intelligent life to develop