Paste your essay in here…The existence of G-d is a question that is constantly debated. Theories and arguments have been proposed to give light to the question and express a view as to why G-d does or does not exist. William Paley, a philosopher known for his contributions to theology, proposed the argument of design. This argument is expressed in terms of human experiences and while it presents some room for objection, ultimately is a sound argument, ie., The universe has been designed and reflects a purpose in its functionality, as all the parts and pieces of the universe work together and show a solidified creation by an intelligent creator, G-d.
The Argument from Design can be viewed as an inference to the best explanation. It is an argument that is based upon the observation and evidence of the world as looked upon by the end or purpose exhibited by the universe. The argument is a teleological argument for the existence of G-d. That means that the world serves a particular purpose that we have seen based on our experiences from nature. Paley’s argument goes through many elements of the world that express the characteristics of contrivance or design. Paley begins his argument by talking about a series of watches. Looking at the big picture, objects either have a function or they don’t. Watches have a function, telling time. To perform this function, watches go through a series of complex features and movements and the best explanation for the features and movements is its function. Following that logic, the watch must have a designer. Now suppose we come across a series of self-replicating watches. We would assume that it is considerably more complex than a single watch and that it serves a particular function. The best explanation for the series of self-replicating watches would be that it was designed by a designer. Furthermore, the world is more complex than a series of self-replicating watches in its features and movements. If the complexity of the series is evidence of its purpose, then the complexity of the world is evidence of its purpose. Since the world then has a purpose, the world has a designer. This argument is based on an analogy between a watch and watchmaker. We look at the designer for the watch as a watchmaker and the designer for the universe as G-d. Taking a step further, Paley connects the design of a telescope to that of an eye. The eye was made for vision as the telescope was made for assisting it. As they are made upon the same principles, the construction of each to function properly was based on a plan. A fish eye on the other hand is made differently than that of the human eye. Paley continues saying that the design of the eyes, whether it is a human, fish or any other animal, is constructed and designed in such a way that exhibits such skill and knowledge that shows a concrete purpose of the object, one that G-d could only create.
The argument is based upon another analogy that we can find an objection to his argument of the existence of G-d. In order to make a watch there must be a team of people. While yes there is a designer, there is also a maker, manufacture, and distributor. The analogy leaves space to infer that yes, the universe had a designer, but there were numerous other aspects that led the universe to be what it is now. We have to assume that if a watch, as complex as it is requiring all of those people to create it and make sure its function serves its purpose, that the universe has even more than just a single creator, and thus we conclude that the universe was created from G-d. In addition, the theory of evolution as proposed by Darwin represents a problem for the argument. Paley discusses the design of an eye and how it was created in such a way that is perfect for its purpose. Its function is even more complex in design than a watch and represents a higher bar of design. Darwin says that the design of a telescope has been perfected over time with the highest thought from human intellect. He states that the inferences that the eye was perfected over time due most likely to natural selection. In living bodies, we have passed on alterations that have perfected our bodies and created the improvements necessary to be the intelligent design we see ourselves to be. Since, we are able to adapt and continuously improve, we in ourselves, are our own creator.
As with any argument, objections can be made. However, I believe Paley’s argument is sound and will show why these two objections to the argument are misguided. When looking at the argument of having different agents all work together to form a watch, it can be seen that as humans work in a way that utilizes others. This fact while may be true, doesn’t look at the capabilities of humans to the highest standard. It may be possible for a human to design, distribute and manufacture a watch. The thought that one does not represent a shortcoming in our abilities. The assumption that because a watch may require more than one person to create it actually further supports Paley’s argument. An all knowing, intellectual being would have the ability to design and create the universe all by itself since it is a higher being than a human. Human intellect would not be to the same standards as G-d. For the theory of evolution as presented by Darwin we have to understand that a watch was not perfect on the first design. Over the course of the existence of watches there has been continuous improvements and changes that have been made to get it where it is today. Just like the existence of humans and the eyes, it could very well be that G-d, when designing the universe, created it in one way and then was in the power of making adjustments and redesigning things in order to make them the way they are now.
The creation of the earth and the existence of a creator is a very complicated concept. As a watch represents an intelligent design, so do humans and the world. A watch as it self-replicates represents a boundary that is put on a human designer. As a human, there is only so much we are capable of designing and creating. This leads to further prove Paley’s argument that in order to design and create a world as intelligent and complex as the one in which we live, there must be a more powerful and higher being capable of doing so.
The understanding of a designer being required for something to have a purpose, is the glue behind the argument. It is sensible to realize that a watch could not function and serve its purpose on its own. The existence of a watch is not probable from a series of random natural events. There was someone that took materials and put all of them together in order to create it. It took materials to be shaped and formed and connected to other material that were shaped and formed in order for the watch to tell time. It is nearly impossible for the watch to function properly had someone not intervened with the elements of the world to design it. The universe is pieced together by millions of components. Each has been arranged and functions in a way that has allowed for the universe to be as it is. The universe cannot have happened by chance of natural events if its function and purpose is so fine tuned. The universe was designed by G-d.