PAYLEYS TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT IS SUCCESSFUL - DISCUSS.

INTRO

The teleological argument attempts to prove God’s existence as everything is made with a telos, suggesting an intelligent designer which allows these things to flourish. Payley’s 1802 teleological order presents his argument through design qua purpose/regularity

DESIGN QUA PURPOSE

Posteriori argument
Analogy of the watch - everything in the world indicates complexity. Compares complexity and purpose of the world as a watch - we would know an intelligent designer made a watch, even if its purpose is unknown.
IE. an eye: complex, made to see

DESIGN QUA REGULARITY

Made with early scientific discoveries: Newton, which shows design within the universe. Astronomy: predictable gravity, rotation of planets etc.

STRENGTHS OF DESIGN QUA PURPOSE/REGULARITY

Purpose observed in living beings - bird wings designed to fly, infers a design even if purpose can sometimes be unclear.
Brown noted thickness of ozone layer is just right - Goldilocks theory

WEAKNESS OF DESIGN QUA PURPOSE/REGULARITY

Hume calls it a logical fallacy (to Aquinas’ analogy of the arrow) to compare machinery to the world - more accurate to compare something organic; no obvious creator on an orange
Laws of entropy states there is a tendency towards disorder

DARWIN

Darwinism - empirical to show that through natural selection, creatures most suited for their environment will survive - characteristics passed on this evolution.
Finches on Galapagos Islands with differing beaks to extract/break seeds = apparent design is just this process

STRENGTHS OF DARWINISM

Explains regularity and purpose as a result of chance. Random mutation give us high survival advantage, and is kept within the genetic coding as the survivors reproduce and pass on this characteristic

WEAKNESS OF DARWINISM (+COUNTER)

Payley argues (anticipated) that a broken watch still has an apparent despite even if it has no purpose
The wastefulness or bad support - animals who cannot adapt well 0 support no intellectual design

HUME

Dialogues concerning the natural religion
The nature of a posteriori argument - observing order/purpose we cannot apply to the same criteria of the world.
Fallacy of composition. Humans are infallible, limited understanding - why not an anthropomorphic God?

STRENGTHS OF HUME

Hume scale of analogy - we cannot assume that just because a man-made machine has a designer that the world must have one
One-side of the scale hidden from view = no way to know what is balancing that weight

WEAKNESSES OF HUME/COUNTER-ARGUMENT

Payley - he couldn’t throw all the parts of the watch within the air + expect them to fall so that the watch worked/told the time.
Epicurean Hypothesis - infinite time w/ finite particles undergo every possible combination, one must be stable order - ARBITRARY

CONCLUSION

Payley is unsuccessful as it makes too many logical fallacies which can be explained by other parts of the universe, change behind ‘design.’
DAWKINS - “The blind watchmaker,” support evolution as random but cumulative