‘Assess how credible evolution is as alternatives to the design argument for the existence of God’ (12 marks) Clarify the key ideas Order and purpose What is evolution and how it replaces God Outline opinion Evolution is not a credible alternative Idea Gaps in fossil records Not explanation for why Argument Against Does have some evidence Dawkins - purpose Counter Argument There is evidence for design Unlikely to be chance Conclusion Evolution fails

‘Assess how credible evolution is as alternatives to the design argument for the existence of God’ (12 marks) The design argument for the existence of God is largely based upon the idea that the cumulative effect of all of the order and purpose that exists within the universe is proof that it could not have come about by chance, it must have been designed and the only thing powerful enough to do this is God. Evolution could be seen to challenge the design argument as it does not rely upon an omnipotent and omnibenevolent creator carefully creating the universe; instead it offers the alternative that following an explosion in space, life evolved over billions of years through the process of natural selection. This theory could therefore be seen as making God totally redundant. I believe that the strengths of the design argument make it convincing and as such, evolution fails to be a credible alternative. The first problem with evolution is that parts of the theory are missing or incomplete; for example there are significant gaps in the fossil records that are meant to chart the evolution of the species. Additionally, a crucial gap in the theory of evolution is its complete absence of any explanation for why the universe was created in the first place, what is its purpose? However, some people would argue that even though there are gaps in the evidence for evolution, unlike the existence of God, it does have empirical evidence to support it. Additionally, Dawkins would criticise our rejection of the theory over its ignorance of the purpose of the universe as he argued that humans are obsessed with trying to find a purpose in everything, we view the world through ‘purpose coloured spectacles’. He believed that we should accept that we are simply here, especially as the chances of our existence are so small. I however believe that these criticisms can be overcome. Firstly, the design argument does offer a degree of empirical evidence as the amount of order and purpose in the universe can be observed and verified. Many would argue that the cumulative effect of all of this evidence offer convincing proof for the existence of a designing God. Additionally, I believe that Dawkins is misguided in his view to ignore the possible purpose of the universe as it is not just its mere existence that is so unlikely but also its providential nature; the fact that it contains everything necessary for human survival that makes it so unlikely to be here as the result of chance. For these reasons, I am compelled to believe that evolution fails to be a credible alternative to God designing the universe.