The Argument from Design

The Argument Famously presented by William Paley, who imagined stumbling across a watch in a wilderness Famously presented by William Paley, who imagined stumbling across a watch in a wilderness When we come to inspect the watch, we perceive … that its several parts are framed and put together for a purpose … the inference, we think, is inevitable; that the watch must have had a maker. When we come to inspect the watch, we perceive … that its several parts are framed and put together for a purpose … the inference, we think, is inevitable; that the watch must have had a maker. When we look at the world we see that its parts are fitted for a purpose When we look at the world we see that its parts are fitted for a purpose Therefore the World must have had a designer Therefore the World must have had a designer

The Argument 1. 1.It is claimed that the World has the property that its parts are perfectly fitted to work together to perform a function 2. 2.A watch also has the property that its parts are perfectly fitted to work together to perform a function 3. 3.A watch also has the property of being designed by an intelligence Therefore the World also has the property of being designed by an intelligence.

The Argument 1.It is claimed that an object has properties P1, P2, …, Pn. 2.analogues A1, A2, …, Am have properties P1, P2, …, Pn. 3.The analogues have property P Therefore the object has property P. [5.If an object has properties P1, P2, …, Pn, it will also have property P.]

The Argument 1. 1.It is claimed that the World has the property that its parts are perfectly fitted to work together to perform a function 2. 2.A watch has the property that its parts are perfectly fitted to work together to perform a function 3. 3.A watch has the property of being designed by an intelligence Therefore the World also has the property of being designed by an intelligence. [5. [5.If an object has the property that its parts are perfectly fitted to work together to perform a function it will also have the property of being designed by an intelligence.]

The Argument 2.Analogues A1, A2, …, Am have properties P1, P2, …, Pn. 3.The analogues have property P If an object has properties P1, P2, …, Pn, it will also have property P. 1.An object has properties P1, P2, …, Pn Therefore the object has property P.

The Argument A.The more analogues the better B. The more common properties in the analogues the better C. The more falsifying instances the less likely the analogue

The Argument Thomas Reid We may observe a very great similitude between this earth which we inhabit, and the other planets, Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, Venus, and Mercury. They all revolve around the sun, as the earth does, although at different distances and in different periods. They borrow all their light from the sun, as the earth does. Several of them are known to revolve round there axis like the earth, and by that means must have a like succession of day and night. Some of them have moons, that serve to give them light in the absence of the sun, as our moon does to us. They are all, in their motions, subject to the same law of gravitation, as the earth is. From all this similitude, it is not unreasonable to think that that those planets may, like our earth, be the habitation of various orders of living creatures. There is some probability in this conclusion from analogy.

The Argument Cleanthes (Hume) Look around the world: Contemplate the whole and every part of it: You will find it to be nothing but one great machine, subdivided into an infinite number of lesser machines, which again admit of subdivisions, to a degree beyond what human senses and faculties can trace and explain. All these various machines, and even their most minute parts, are adjusted to each other with an acuracy, which ravishes into admiration all men, who have ever contemplated them.

The Argument Cleanthes (Hume) The curious adapting of means to ends, throughout all nature, resembles exactly, though it much exceeds, the production of human contrivance; of human design, thought, wisdom, and intelligence. Since therefore the effects resemble each other, we are led to infer, by all the rules of analogy, that the causes also resemble, and that the Author of nature is somewhat similar to the mind of man, though possessed of much larger faculties, proportioned to the grandeur of the work, which He has executed. By this argument a posteriori, and by this argument alone, do we prove at once the existence of a Deity and His similarity to human mind and intelligence.

The Argument a. The parts of machines of human contrivance fit together wonderfully for their purposes. b.They do so because they are designed to do so by a mind c.If parts work together for an end that is probably because they have been designed to do so by a mind. d.The parts of the world fit together wonderfully for their purposes e.Therefore they have probably been designed to do so by a mind.

The Objections Doing without Mind Doing without Mind Vegetable reproduction Vegetable reproduction Animal reproduction Animal reproduction Instinct Instinct Inanimate Powers Inanimate Powers

The Objections Doing without God Doing without God The God of Trial and Error The God of Trial and Error Santa’s Elves Santa’s Elves God as Man God as Man

The Objections Philo This world, for aught he knows, is very faulty and imperfect, compared to a superior standard; and was only the first rude essay of some infant Deity, who afterwards abandoned it, ashamed of his lame performance; it is the work only of some dependent inferior Deity; and it is the object of derision to his superiors; it is the production of old age and dotage in some super- annuated Deity; and ever since his death, has run on at adventures, from the first impulse and active force which it received from him…