William Paley is a philosopher well known in the 18th and 19th century. He was well known for his piece entitled, “Natural Theology” which is a piece that argues for the existence of God and constantly compares it to a watch. He argues that if no one has seen someone one has seen a watch before, they would most likely believe that someone created it. He argues this because the complexity of the object was to complex for it to have just been that way naturally. In some people 's opinions, God can not create something so complex and can only be man made. Paley argument is correct because God created several parts that make up the whole watch, there was a plan before creating the watch, and the watch has a function. Paley is correct because God created the many parts that make up something so complex. He put minerals, metals and other things on the earth to even make up the whole watch. In the work that Paley wrote he states, “I. Nor would it, I apprehend, weaken the conclusion that we had never see a watch made: that we had …show more content…
I say this because the watch wasn’t just put together randomly in hope that it would do something. Someone took the time planning it out just like God did with the Universe. The watch took time to plan out to ensure that everything would work in the spots that they were in. You can see this when he says, “There cannot be design without a designer; contrivance without a contriver; order, without choice;” (Paley 49). That quote just shows that things take time to be planned out and everything has a purpose. In the watch, every little dial, wristband, minute hand, had a purpose and was there for a reason. The watch goes hand and hand with God making the Universe. God planned out the earth putting oxygen, plants, water and other things here for a purpose. We didn’t see the Universe being made, but God planned everything out and did it for a
William Paley was a well known theologian in the 19th century responsible for surmising the existence of “an intelligent creator by design.” His argument, built up to and stated on page 29, Chapter III, paragraph 1 in sentence 1 is as follows: “for every indication of contrivance, every manifestation of design, which existed in the watch, exists in the works of nature”. Before diving into the meaning behind this, there are terms to be defined. By contrivance, Paley means artificiality, or to have been made. A watch, as easy as it is to grasp, is simply the mechanism on your wrist that tells you the time of day.
Realizing the Lord's objective when establishing the universe offers perspective to those within it, and allows them to understand how glorifying Him will always be critical. God continues
This was a contemporary thought of the time about God and HIS active involvement in life. P2. The biblical age of the Earth does not support Darwin's evolutionary theory.
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.
Otherwise the watch wouldn’t exist at all. In the same way, Paley argues that the world must have had a creator who already knows what the world is, in order for it to exist, otherwise it would not be here presently. All that would exist would be the materials needed for the product, so to speak. In this case, if the world did not exist, then only the materials need to construct the world, scatter about the universe, would exist. God is portrayed as the watchmaker in this sense, which corresponds with how philosophers, and perhaps Christians, understood him during the time.
Throughout this book the author, Darrel R. Falk, argues from his personal journey as a professing evangelical Christian and biologist, that only science, and not scripture, can reveal the details of creation. In the first chapter, the author talks about how, when one is living with both science and religion; it is like trying to live in two worlds at once. Falk spoke about how he grew up in a church that taught a literal view of Genesis, but those in leadership were not equipped to answer his questions about contradictions between the Bible and the real world. For this reason, Faulk drifted away from Christianity towards a life studying biology. Eventually he
The Teleological Argument In the Theological Argument, Premise one says that ‘The world, and every part of it, is like a machine, in that its parts are adjusted to each other, with means adapted to ends’. Paley explains how finding a mechanical watch on the ground is like understanding the world (Paley, 56). The watch displays
Huygens said, “suppose nobody will deny but there’s somewhat more of contrivance, somewhat more of a miracle in the production and growth of plants and animals than in lifeless heaps of inanimate bodies … For the finger of God, and the wisdom of divine providence is in them much more clearly manifested than in the other” (Tyson, Eil DeGrasse). Scientist Huygens argument clearly shows that science depends on religion to understand some concepts. It indicates that they believe that God is the creator of the living organisms. Additionally, to understand their existence it means seeking knowledge from the Scripture
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.
Irreducible complexity This is a common point of disagreement between pro-evolutionists and anti-evolutionists. The irreducible complexity argument from anti-evolutionists states that complex structures like the human eye cannot arise from a process of natural selection and evolution alone. This is because if you take parts away from the eye it fails to function, leading one to conclude the eye must have been made in one act of creation by a supernatural intelligence, the same way a watch would have had to be made from start to finish by an intelligent watchmaker with the intention of an end-goal which would be the final watch itself. Half a watch, or three-quarters of a watch would serve no practical purpose.
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?
He states, “The mere existence of the world constitutes no reason for believing in the existence of such a being.” This conclusion is false because, as explained by Evans and Manis, within the universe itself, no there cannot be found any logical reason for its own existence and therefore it points to a necessary cause. (2009). It is natural to ask why things came to exist when considering the laws that govern our universe. Ultimately, every contingent thing (everything in the universe) must have been caused by an uncaused cause.
Philosopher David Hume’s argument against William Paley’s addresses the most common criticism in why Paley is wrong. Hume’s points out two major flaws in Paley’s argument that there is a creator of the universe. The first argument is the lack of evidence, in which he states that the existence of such a creator can only be proved through the a pattern of observation, which there is no pattern for. This addresses how without any form of pattern through observation that it is difficult to make a correlation between the universe and its designer (Speaks). Secondly he argumes that there are limitations to the design argument that Paley does not address.
All of the philosophers that we've studied so far have made some valid arguments concerning the existence, or non-existence of God. If I had to be swayed by an opinion for God's existence, or non-existence it would have to be by William Paley's argument. Paley's analogy is strong because of his metaphor of the watch to explain the universe and the existence of an intelligent designer. The weak part of this analogy is that the watchmaker as evidence can be produced in the physical form; the universe maker as evidence cannot be produced in physical form.
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.