In this essay I have chosen to critically assess William Paley’s argument of the world as being designed. I will begin my assessment with a discussion on Paley’s analogy of the world being created by a designer; which shall be followed by two detailed critiques against his claim of the world having a designer. Then, I shall conclude with my own summation of whether Paley’s claim, of their being a designer of the world, is strong enough to withstand these objections; or whether these critiques hold enough weight of support to disprove Paley’s argument of design. First, I will begin with an analysis of Paley’s argument of design. Paley’s argument of design is presented as an inductive argument by analogy; which he presents as ‘the watch and the …show more content…
Through this assessment of Paley’s argument of design and both Hume’s and Darwin’s criticisms of the design argument I think Hume has rationally good premises to explain the design argument in a different light. I think his claim is strong enough to defunct Paley’s theory of design, though not the entire argument of design. Hume’s acknowledgement of the lack of evidence of there being an omnipotent God and his claim of there possibly being a team of designer which created the world is reasonable to conceive. I think that since both arguments are inductive in nature, Hume’s argument of God’s existence hold just as much probabilistic support as Paley’s, especially in claim of the world being created by a team of designers. If we were created in God’s image and God were a perfect designer why would he design a world full of imperfection. I think it is logical to assume that a world created by a team of deities knowledgeable in their particular purpose in the world would create a world with imperfection within because these gods are not perfect and could never achieve a world of perfection. Furthermore, Darwin’s claim falls short because of his all- or- nothing reasoning on variations and natural selection. I believe the world’s designer/s could have set up the right conditions for the process of evolution to occur. Hume’s argument allows for trial and error, which is commonly used in scientific claims. Due to these facts, and the ones stated previously, I think Hume’s argument, if critically explored more, could be seen as the best design argument for the explanation of the world’s