paley's teleo argument Flashcards
Paley’s design argument- scenario
Imagine walking across the hills and fining a watch. Upon examining the watch, you notice that it has several parts which work together, and the parts are made from appropriate materials which suit their function. By working together in a complex way, the parts produce a well regulate motive of the hands moving. If any of the parts had been different the watch would not have worked properly. Upon finding such a watch one would be compelled to conclude that there must have existed a designer who understood and designed the watch for its purpose. All the evidence if design which exist in the watch also exist in nature but to a greater degree.
explanation- scenario
Paley argues that just as the watch has been designed by a watchmaker so the universe and everything in it has been designed by a designer: God. Paley suggests that if a watch was found by someone who had never even heard of watches before its complexity and the way it functions would be sufficient for the person to realise it had been designed.
argument
P1 a watch has particular features complex parts which work together perfectly for a specific purpose
P2 a watch has these features because it has been designed that way by an intelligent creator- a watchmaker
P3 anything which has complex parts which work together for specific purpose must also have been designed by an intelligent creator
P4 the universe has complex parts which work together for a specific purpose but far more amazing and complex than a watch
Conc therefore the universe must have been designed by an intelligent creator but far more amazing than a watch marker ie god
alt explanation
Paley considers whether the universe may have formed itself into an ordered system as a result of random chance. This is called the epicurean hypothesis, which suggests that time is infinite matter will at times form itself into ordered arrangements and it just so happens that it’s in a state of order at the moment.
such as the watch could have due to a possible combination of material forms or out of a principle of order.
however, the watch could not have come together due to purely random processes. darwin’s laws of nature can’t account for the parts of the watch coming together, it may account for things like the coming together of the parts of an eye.
Paley dismisses the possibility that our universe could have come about by chance because things are so well suited to their purpose human eyes animals in their habitats and so on.
alt explanation pt2
watch making machine makes watches
paley’s second examination of the watch consists of the possibility of the watch not being made by a watchmaker.
the watch could have been made by a watchmaking machine leading to the possibility that the watchmaking machine was made by another watchmaking machine and so on.
the issue is does it undermined the teleological argument as by showing that the watch doesnt mad eby a watchmaker and in turn, god was not needed in the creation of the universe.
however, the watchmaking machine consists of features that a supposed designer would have, it has ordered and regulated parts fit for its purpose.
for paley if we were to go back on the watchmaking machines we still need to account for these features which still indicates there is a designer.
strengths
There are somethings which do seem to fit their purpose so well that it can be hard to believe they were not designed that way- for example the eye is perfectly made if it were any different it wont work.
God as the designer of the universe explains why everything fits its purpose whereas science has not yet been able to explain why everything fits its purpose.
weakness
kant- universe could be designed but cant prove its by god
hume- god is lazy
paley and hume- no experience of universe being designed
Kant points out that even if Paley could prove the universe has been designed, we can’t infer that it was designed by god. The universe’s designer could have been finite, lacking in power, evil and could be long dead.
Hume suggest that if a watch was malfunctioning, we would infer a lazy or incompetent designer. There are problems of spatial disorder, mass extinctions and other evils which can be seem as problems with the universe so perhaps we should infer a designer who in not omnipotent or omnibenevolent.
Paley and Hume notes that we have experiences of watches and other machines being designed but we have no experience of universes being designed the universe is a unique case.
response- swimburne
experience is not needed
Swinburne supports Paley’s argument by suggesting that we do not need direct experience of universe making in order to know it was designed we can just observer the design and infer a designer
The arrangement of parts for a purpose does not prove the existence of a designer.
weakness- theory of evolution hume-not god but gods? hume- analogy= weak paley and hume- lack knowledge
Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution adequately explains how animals fits their habitats and how the human eye evolved without reference to a designer or God
Hume points out that watches and other artefacts are often designed by teams of people the universe may have been designed by a group of beings.
Hume argues that an analogy between a human made object and the universe is very weak: human made objects are part of the universe.
Paley and Hume suggest that if a watch was found by someone who had never seen any machine before then he would not know it had been designed
Response- world examples
Paley points out that we know that the Egyptian pyramids and Stonehenge were designed simply by looking at them even though were not sure how or why they were designed.
