Teleological Argument For The Existence Of God

Argument for the Existence of God: Teleological or Designer Argument

In the Teleological argument for the existence of God, focuses on Paley’s idea that the world by observation exhibits order and purpose and there must be a divine intelligence, a supreme designer for a perceived purpose to occur (Pojmans, 118). Darwin and Hume each presented an objection on the Paley’s analogy and argument on the existence of God, based on the complexity in human artifacts and man-made objects (126) .The argument presented by William Paley’s Natural Theology where it demonstrates a well thought “watch” argument (119). The supporters of the design argument propose that by no chance did the universe and its structures arise, but there is an intelligent designer.

First, Paley’s so-called design that attempt to reason to God's existence from demonstrating the order of the whole Universe and its regularities or laws of nature. The attempt to reason to God's existence from the orderliness indicated in living organisms, their complexity, and being well-suited for the tasks of reproduction and survival. Paley's Natural Theology gives elaborate details of a local design argument. Hume work through his three characters presented his criticisms, but Cleanthes showed strong arguments that were similar in a way to Paley’s to counter his Hume’s explanations. In my opinion, Hume accepts the point that design argument is more likely that the universe had been designed and there was an intelligent designer. However, he disapproves the argument that the designer is God. He pointed to the existence of a conscious designing intelligence, but not really the God of absolutely metaphysically being. Darwinian evolution and theory demonstrates how random natural processes over a period of time produce evolution of living things (124). The theory of evolution seems to refute Paley’s argument but the claims made on the theory of evolution is not a standing claim to show that God does not exist (125). I believe that the Darwinian theory of evolution does not, however, destroy every point of design argument, since not all versions of the design argument are based on the

Is religious belief rational or is irrational activity? (166). Atheist absolutely oppose it due to the lack of evidence, but Theists beliefs in it and thus they fall into two major sides (166). Those who belief in God has sufficient evidence for it to be rational (166)), and those who belief in God does not require evidence for it to be rational (166). Those who do not really belief in God as belong to the realm of the rational (166). The relationship between the reason and religious beliefs has been highlighted by the three parts mentioned According to Pojman an argument for an ethical duty to strictly believe in accord with the evidence available that supports it (170). I concur that a person’s beliefs can affect the well-being of others, it is best to be open- minded towards criticism (167). According to Pojman, one can hold positions that faith and reason are compatible, that it is rational to belief in God (166). And lastly that faith can be opposed to reason and therefore faith is the questionable area of rationality (166). In the case of Kierkegaard, shows the two subsides are compatible that both the faith is above reason (167). Kant, Blaise Pascal in his classical work Thoughts, did not believe rationality can determine whether or not God exists (167). The reason has to be above and beyond its limits and therefore Blaise Pascal