Short Essay on Question One
Name
Course
Date
Argument from Design
The design argument (teleological argument) suggests that there are complexity and order in the universe. According to this argument, things exhibiting this complexity and order have designers. Thus, the universe has its designer, God. This argument applies to analogy. It uses peoples’ experiences in explaining the cause of the universe. It is an inductive type of argument, where the conclusion is supported by premises, though the premises do not entail the end. Its base is on the information coming from people’s senses. The design on the universe is based on experiences; it exists after the fact of complexity and order.
Different scholars have developed different versions of the design argument. Thomas Aquinas (the Archer) believes that all things on the universe have a purpose given by God[1]. He likens this with an arrow flying in the sky with its purpose being given by the archer. William Paley (The watchmaker) claims that just like watches, which experience order and complexity to tell time, the universe, is full of complexity and a role of sustaining life, and it has a designer, who is God. Also, F.R Tenant stands by his Anthropic Principle, which postulates that God designed the universe with a sole purpose of supporting the life of humans. The other scholar was Michael Behe, whose argument counters the opposition from evolution. He states that some things in the universe are irreducibly complex; their existence isn’t a chance. God had a purpose for designing them.
The strengths associated with the argument of design are the strengths of inductive reasoning. This argument is based on things that can be observed[2]. It is not easy to deny the availability of complexity and order in the world. The reasoning in this claim starts with universal experiences. In another strength, the design argument does not solely depend on fixed explanations that people have to accept. Besides, the application of analogy in the argument gives it comprehensiveness. It also fits with the reasoning of humans, motivating them in their study about nature.
Nevertheless, the design argument has weaknesses too. For instance, it is utterly impossible to advance to outright totality by the experimental road. Besides, the proof of the argument is inductive, and thus its conclusion is just probable. Simply because most things in the world have their designers, this doesn’t necessarily mean the universe has a designer too[3]. The unique nature of the universe makes it impossible for people to make their assumptions on how unique things were created. Moreover, the universe could have been designed, but people are not sure whether the designer was one. Attributes of a creator are reflected in his/her creation. Hence, the presence of evil and suffering in the world is an attribute of cruelty in the designer. Further, the complexity and order that people see in the universe could be their perception. Perhaps, there couldn’t be any order, neither complexity. People might be imposing it. Analogous arguments of the design reduce and constrain nature, as they propose that nature is like other artificial features.
In conclusion, the design argument is a posteriori argument for God’s existence. It is also considered as the intelligent argument as it is based on perceived evidence of intentional design in the physical/natural world.
Bibliography
Cilia-Vincenti, Victor. “God and design in nature.” Bachelor’s thesis, University of Malta, 2016.
Khatchadourian, Haig. “The New Design Argument and God.” Wisdom 6, no. 1 (2016): 46-66.
[1] Cilia-Vincenti, Victor. “God and design in nature.” Bachelor’s thesis, University of Malta, 2016.
[2] Ibid 1
[3] Khatchadourian, Haig. “The New Design Argument and God.” Wisdom 6, no. 1 (2016): 46-66.