TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT

• The Design Argument is ‘a posteriori’
• Suggests that certain aspects of the universe are so perfectly adapted to fulfill their
  function that they display evidence of being deliberately designed.
• Such design can only be explained with reference to an intelligent, infinitely great
  designer – God.

• The universe has order, purpose and regularity
• The complexity of the universe shows evidence of design • Such design needs a designer
• The designer of the universe is God

Some philosophers believe that the order and regularity of the universe is proof of a design- er – this is ‘design qua regularity’ and supported by St Thomas Aquinas

The Fifth of his Five Ways

• Many objects do not have the intelligence to work towards an end purpose themselves. (Aquinas used the example of an acorn whose end was an oak tree)
• Therefore, they must be directed by something that does have intelligence.
• Whatever lacks intelligence cannot move towards an end, unless it is directed by some
  being endowed with intelligence.
• Therefore, there must be an intelligent being and this being we call God.
• Just as an archer (intelligent being) must direct an arrow (an object without intelli-
  gence), God must direct nature.

Other philosophers look at the way the parts of the universe fit together for a purpose or function. This is ‘design qua purpose’, supported by William Paley.

William Paley’s analogy of the watch has become the classic explanation of the Argument:

• The watch could not be explained by saying that it had always been there.
• The watch has the feature of a manufactured machine in that the parts fit together to
  achieve a specific function (e.g telling the time).
• Manufactured machines are the result of intelligent design.
• Objects in nature are analogous to manufactured machines.
• Analogous effects have analogous causes.
• Therefore, objects in nature are the result of something analogous to intelligent design.
• The agent responsible for such design must be God.

• Aquinas looks at the regularity of action – that ‘natural bodies’ act in a regular fashion to accomplish their ends.
• The order in the world is proof of a designer.
• Paley looks at design and how things fit together for a purpose.
• Complex arrangements suggest an intelligent designer.

Tennant, in his book; ‘Philosophical Theology’ said that there must be a designer because;

• The universe perfectly fits the development of life.
• The universe is designed in a way that allows life to grow and develop. • Most importantly, it is designed to develop intelligent human life.
• This is the ‘Anthropic Principle’.
  Tennant also spoke of the ‘Aesthetic Argument’ – that human beings can appreciate and enjoy beauty, music, art, literature – none of which is vital to survival, but is there to develop qualities of beauty and love.

• Humans do not have enough knowledge to know if the world is designed or not.
• Our world is more organic than mechanical so would be better compared to a carrot
  than a watch.
• Similar effects do not necessarily imply similar causes.
• The existence of unpleasant features of nature suggests that God is not just and good.
• The analogy makes God more human than divine - if God is to be compared with a hu-
  man designer then it limits him.
• The presence of order could be explained in many ways without reference to God.
• Unless the universe was an orderly place, people would not be around to comment on
  its existence.
• The universe could have come about by chance (e.g. Epicurean hypothesis).
• There could be many creators – a committee of gods.

• Natural selection gives the appearance of design – but it is blind, unconscious and an automatic process.
• The universe is purely mechanistic, driven by biological impulses.
• Evolution is carried on through random mutations in the genetic make-up of living
  creatures.
• This lead to a mistaken belief that there was a designer.
• The world is not designed.

• The universe exists and is not chaotic but orderly.
• The reasoning leading to the existence of God uses empirical principles. • It is a centuries-old argument supported by many philosophers.
• it is an a posteriori argument and therefore based on empirical evidence. • It supports many scientific notions.
• Similar effects have similar causes.
• Science tell us that laws exist but not why they exist.
• Nature seems to have laws that are constant.
• The universe seems fine-tuned for life for human beings.

• The universe could be the result of a lucky chance.
• It does not follow that the designer must be God.
• There is no way to verify the truth of design claims.
• The world resembles more a carrot than a watch.
• To know that the universe must arise from intelligence we would have to have experienced the origin of the universe.
• The analogy with machines makes God more human than divine.
• There are unpleasant features of nature such as earthquakes and disease.
• The universe is bound to have the appearance of design since there could be no uni-
  verse if parts of it were not mutually adapted.
• If the universe were not orderly we would not be around to comment on it. So it is not surprising we find order.