Paley's Intelligent Design Argument

789 Words4 Pages
In his 1802 work Natural Theology, William Paley attempts to logically prove that God exists and created the universe, known the Intelligent Design argument (Himma). In this argument, he states that the universe is like a watch in three relevant aspects, complexity, regularity, and purpose. Because of this, he says, we know that a watch has a creator, therefore the universe must also have a creator. However, I believe that this argument is flawed because I think the analogy does not work on two of these counts, regularity, and purpose. I also believe that Paley uses circular logic to explain his definition of purpose.
Paley argues for the existence of God by using an argument through analogy, comparing the universe to a watch. He says that
…show more content…
In fact, the concept of entropy describes the fact that the universe is actually more prone of disorder and irregularity and order and regularity (Entropy). I also believe that he is incorrect about the universe having purpose. While some objects have an apparent purpose, such as wings made to fly, sharp teeth made to hunt, etc., most living and nonliving things do not have a clear purpose. Birds do not have a clear purpose, jaguars do not have a clear purpose, humans do not have a clear purpose. The universe itself does not have a clear purpose. Paley’s idea that both the universe and the watch have purpose is flawed, because while the watch was made to tell time, Paley’s concept of a universal purpose came from the Bible, which was written on the assumption that God exists. Therefore, it cannot be used to prove Paley’s point about purpose. It also does not make sense for some things to be made part of the universe, such as the blind spot in an eye, or vestigial structures like a tailbone in humans or hip bones in whales. These things do not have a purpose, and can even be damaging to the individual. Finally, I believe that the aspects Paley observed between the universe and the watch can be explained by natural selection and evolution. Of course, Paley would not have known about this at the time of writing his paper, which is why he doesn’t take it into
Open Document