Arguments for the existence of God: the Design Argument

Question 1

Is it a posteriori or a priori?

Answer 1

A posteriori. It is empirical in nature and is based on sense experience.

Question 2

Define empirical.

Answer 2

An argument that is based on the experience of the senses (touch, taste, hearing, smell and sight).

Question 3

Is it inductive or deductive?

Answer 3

Inductive. Based on probability and not knock-down proof. The conclusion is not necessarily true; the stronger the evidence for it, the more likely it is to be true.

Question 4

Finish the sentence: Paley’s argument is ana…

Answer 4

Analogical. It is based on a comparison between the features of two different things.

Question 5

What approach does Paley’s argument use?

Answer 5

The approach of natural theology. It makes no appeal to any form of special revelation. Uses reason, the latest scientific knowledge and observation.

Question 6

What is natural theology?

Answer 6

The view that questions about God’s existence, nature and attributes can be answered by reasoning, science, history and observation rather than by appeal to special revelation.

Question 7

What is special revelation?

Answer 7

Refers to scripture or some form of religious experience.

Question 8

What three observations of the world is Paley’s argument based on?

Answer 8

Its complexity, purpose and regularity.

Question 9

Paley’s analogy.

Answer 9

Walking across rough ground, seeing a stone wouldn’t raise the issue of how it came to be there. In coming across a watch, it would be reasonable to ask that question.
Observation points to watch’s complexity & purpose. This cannot have occurred by chance- an intelligent watchmaker must have designed it.
Universe is complex, precise arrangement of parts to serve its purpose. This could not have happened by chance- it must have been designed by a universe-maker. The far greater complexity, etc. of the world requires an infinitely greater watchmaker. Therefore, the universe designer is God.

Question 10

What were the illustrations given by Paley to support his argument?

Answer 10

1. The eye is superbly adapted for vision.
2. The fins and gills of fish are perfect for living in water.
3. Birds’ bones, wings and feathers are perfect for flight.
4. There is regularity in the universe of planetary orbits and on earth of the seasons.

Question 11

What were Hume’s two main approaches in challenging the design argument?

Answer 11

Rejection of the idea of design and that little can be said about any designer.

Question 12

Outline Humes approach in challenging the design argument, ‘Rejection of the idea of design’.

Answer 12

MECHANISTIC ANALOGIES= INAPPROPRIATE: such analogies deliberately chosen as they encourage the idea of a designer. living organisms would be more appropriate e.g a vegetable, which does not require explanation in terms of a designer.
APPARENT ORDER COULD BE DUE TO CHANCE: Hume suggested that given the constantly changing arrangements of its atoms over an infinite period of time, it was inevitable that order would eventually emerge. He also suggested the possibility that the universe alternates between periods of chaos and periods of order, and by sheer chance, existence currently is in a period of order.

Question 13

Outline Hume’s approach in challenging the design argument, ‘Little can be said about any designer’.

Answer 13

MECHANISTIC ANALOGY= ANTHROPOMORPHIC: humans have no knowledge of how universes are made, means we cannot know anything about the capacities or nature of any universe designer. Mechanistic analogy is in effect creating a universe designer in our image.
NOT NECESSARILY GOD OF CLASSICAL THEISM: cause must be proportional to its effects (occam’s razor). Traditional christian understanding of God is not required by what is known of the universe. Teamwork is often behind design, so a number of deities of different genders and skills could be behind the universe.
PROBLEM OF EVIL: existence of so much natural and moral evil in the world is evidence of a flawed design. Hume considered God’s omnipotence and omnibenevolence incompatible with the existence of evil. Thus, the existence of evil calls into question the character of a creator God.

Question 14

Anthropomorphic.

Answer 14

Language that attributes human characteristics or ideas to non-human entities.

Question 15

Weaknesses of Paley’s design argument.

Answer 15

1. Claims made by theism about the nature of a designer God go way beyond the evidence.
2. Existence of evil suggests incompetent, indifferent or malevolent designer- or no designer at all.
3. Apparent order, purpose and design are just chance. Support for this from Charles Darwin.
4. Universe could have ‘designed itself’ by chance. Support for this from multiverse theories.

Question 16

Who supports the weakness of the design argument that the apparent order, purpose and design of the universe are just chance?

Answer 16

Charles Darwin.

Question 17

What supports the weakness of the design argument that the universe may have ‘designed itself’?

Answer 17

Multiverse theories.

Question 18

How can you respond to the weakness that ‘Claims made about theism about the nature of a designer God go way beyond the evidence’?

Answer 18

Swinburne argued that the existence of a single omnipotent God is the simplest explanation.

Question 19

How can you respond to the weakness that the existence of evil suggests an incompetent, indifferent or malevolent designer- or no designer at all?

Answer 19

Paley said evil might be unavoidable for God to bring about good.

Question 20

How can you respond to the weakness that apparent order, purpose and design are just chance?

Answer 20

Evolution itself requires explanation (Swinburne). It is not compatible with theism.

Question 21

How can you respond to the weakness that the universe may have designed itself?

Answer 21

Paley’s claim that ‘nature shows intention’ is supported by the Anthropic Principle. The multiverse theory is incapable of proof.

Question 22

The Anthropic Principle.

Answer 22

Relates to the view that the boundary conditions (cosmological constants) of the universe had to be precisely what they are for intelligent life to develop; the belief is that we are not here by chance and that god ‘fine-tuned’ these conditions.

Question 22

Arguments that the design argument cannot offer proof of God.

Answer 22

1. Only deductive arguments can give absolute proof. The Design Argument is inductive, so can never be absolutely certain.
2. Paley’s observations to support his argument can be explained naturally, e.g. the regular rotation of the planets is due to gravity. If the multiverse theory is true, then the apparent design is pure chance.

Question 23

How can you respond to the argument that Paley’s argument cannot provide proof of God because only deductive arguments can give absolute proof?

Answer 23

Most things that we accept as true in life are based on inductive arguments. They are accepted as ‘true beyond reasonable doubt’. The stronger the evidence, the more probably true a claim is.

Question 24

How can you respond to the argument that Paley’s argument cannot provide proof of God because his observations to support his argument can be explained naturally?

Answer 24

Some would argue that the laws of nature require explanation and that we cannot be sure that the multiverse theory is true. This means that the challenges do not diminish the probability that Paley’s argument is true.

Question 25

The positives for the value of Paley’s design argument for religious faith.

Answer 25

1. it is rationally and empirically based.
2. Is consistent with biblical teaching that there is a guiding hand directing the whole of nature and human lives in a purposeful way.
3. Theists cannot prove God’s existence but nor can atheists prove God’s non-existence: both rely on reasoning and empirical evidence to create inductive arguments. Paley’s reasoning and appeal to observation, together with the simplicity of his argument and its reinforcement with the Cosmological Argument, provide strong support for theists.
4. According to Price, religious faith should include both ‘belief that’ and ‘belief in’: his argument gives evidence to support the ‘belief that’ God exists and his description of the universe encourages ‘belief in’ God.

Question 26

The negatives for the value of Paley’s design argument for religious faith.

Answer 26

1. For fideists, rational arguments play no part in faith as they do not lead to commitment.
2. Paley’s argument does not successfully address the issue of evil.

Question 27

Fideism.

Answer 27

The view that religious is a matter of pure faith in the sense of commitment. Rational argument has not role to play.