The conclusion, thus, is that Nature was created by intelligent design. This argument is the centerpiece of Paley’s “Argument from Design”, as he spends the previous two sections deliberately lining the specifics of a watch, the clear order a watch follows, and that there must be a creator for a watch. In this section, he puts forward an analogy that nature is like a watch in that both have specific orders and contrivances which thus mean that both were created by an intelligent
Hambourger’s argument from design argues for the existence of god based on the perceived evidence of deliberate design in the world/universe. To further elaborate on the concepts he uses, Hambourger uses three main concepts; determinism, chance, and mere hap. Hambourger’s argument from design claims that though many things occur by chance, there are some things which we cannot simply accept to have happened by chance, and must therefore have some common explanation in the causal chain of events connecting the two events. For instance the universe is created by many states of affairs coming together. If some slight changes had occurred, the end result could have been vastly different than it currently is.
“During the last one hundred years, physicists have discovered at least three features of the universe that point to a transcendent intelligent designer” (Collins 241). In Robin Collins’ passage, “The Case for Cosmic Design,” Collins writes about how everything on earth is very precisely tuned that any little movement or sudden change could disrupt intelligent life. There are four forces that have to do with this fine tuning such as: gravity, the weak force, electromagnetism, and strong nuclear force. Although many scientists have a different explanation for the creation of life, they all agree that the beauty and elegance of the laws of nature are inexplicable. The intelligence and discoverability of life seems very complex, when really everything falls into place and beings are able to understand such circumstances that the world is under.
For this disputation, I had the pleasure of arguing against the topic of be it resolved that you can convince a non-believer to affirm the existence of God using philosophical arguments. As the opposing side, Sarah and I counter argued the following: the argument from motion, the ontological argument, Pascal’s Wager, the cosmological argument, the teleological argument, and the moral argument. The argument from motion argues that it is only possible to experience that which exists, and people experience God, therefore God must exist; however it can be counter argued that since faith cannot be demonstrated or experienced, as it is unseen, God cannot exist.
The atheist argument for the existence of God is that such a powerful being could not possibly exist with the presence of evil. The argument is that the all-powerful God would not allow evil to exist in the world and would therefore exterminate all evil. While evil still exists within the world this is proof to the atheist that God does not exist. The atheist argument claiming God cannot exist with the presence of evil uses the Judeo-Christian description of God against itself. For in the Judeo-Christian tradition God is said to be an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent being.
According to the Teleological argument the universe resembles a machine due to it 's intelligent design. Being that the universe even exists I believe shows the intelligent design. If you look towards the eco-systems they run on checks and balances the same as any software. When you remove a section it tends to collapse or eventually will collapse. In addition, just as a machine the universe changes and will go through phases in design.
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.
The blind watch maker analogy that was presented is brilliant. Creationists, use their own version of the watchmaker argument saying if you were walking down a beach and you found a watch you could assume there was a designer. But when it comes to talking about existence, physical reality, and life, It’s a little different. The analogy at first glance seems to work but then you realize that even metaphorically speaking it’s an equivocation fallacy.
The Design Argument The question of whether God truly exists has been debated between believers and non-believers for centuries. Also known as the Teleological Argument, the Design Argument argued by William Paley states that there are so many intricate details and designs in our world that there must be a creator. In addition, it also argues that this world could not have been created by chance alone due to the characteristics that make it the perfect condition for human life to exist (Pecorino). In this essay, I will be giving a brief overview of what the Design Argument is, then providing evidence and reasoning in favor of the argument, then addressing the criticisms of the argument, then comparing both sides of the argument, then finally
JL Mackie was persuasive in his argument by showing that belief in an almighty God is not rational. He proves this by posing the problem of evil. According to JL Mackie, if God exists and is omniscient, omnipotent, and good then evil would not exist. However, evil exists in this world, sometimes in the form of undeserved suffering (diseases that affect humans, earthquakes, famines ...) and others perpetrated by man (murders, wars ...). If God exists and has the capability to be powerful, good, omniscient and omnipotent, why would he let evil be perpetrated?
Kant is concerned with the role of teleology in our understanding not only of individual organisms, but also of other natural things and processes, and of nature as a whole. Experience presents us with many cases in which features of a living thing's environment, both organic and inorganic, are beneficial or indeed necessary to it: for example rivers are helpful to the growth of plants, and thus indirectly to human beings, because they deposit soil and thus create fertile land (§63, 367); grass is necessary for cattle and other herbivorous animals, which in turn provide food for carnivores (§63, 368). Kant makes the negative point (a version of which he had earlier argued at length in the Only Possible Argument for the Existence of God of 1763)
Philosopher William Rowe agrees with Plantinga that propositions — that evil exists, God is omnipotent, and God is wholly good — is not logically inconsistent. Rowe does not believe it is impossible to allow God and his properties to exist along with evil. He takes a different route by focusing more on certain kinds of evil which evidently exist in the world, and not so much on the inconsistencies of the theist doctrines. This certain evil, in Rowe’s point of view, will show that a God who is all powerful and wholly good does not exist after all.
He further elaborates on this watch saying that even if you had never seen a watch made or known someone to make it you would still recognize that the watch had a creator. Also the watch at times may go wrong, even if this happens it still does not prove that the watch does not have a creator. Further that the watch has parts whose functions are unknown this still does not determine that the watch does not have a creator. Ultimately what this argument comes down to is that the watch is an analogy for the universe and or human beings. All of these things he attributed to the watch is in like fashion attributed to the universe.
Argument for the existence of god is being proposed in several ways. Some based on science while some are about personal experience and some on philosophical arguments such as ontological arguments, first cause arguments, arguments based on deign, moral arguments. Each of these support conception. Ontological argument say that if you inculcate the idea of god , we can see him . There is a saying that “Nothing comes from Nothing but something comes from something”.
He says that the universe is the most amazing achievement imaginable. The merit or value of an achievement is the product of its intrinsic quality and ability of its creator. If we think about God who has no hands even he created universe then
