Looking at the idea around Intelligent Design and the idea of there being a designer was quite interesting to read about this semester. Francisco Ayala wrote an article called, Darwin’s greatest discovery: Design without designer. He writes that the theory of evolution is about chance and necessity along with randomness and determinism. Darwin accepted that organisms are “designed” as many like to call it and are basically functionally organized (Ayala 1). He explains his idea of common descent from modification as being a natural process of designing organisms. In the Origin of Species, Darwin wanted to explain design with evolution playing a role in it (Ayala 3). He writes, “According to Darwin’s theory of natural selection, the design has
…show more content…
One big writer on the subject of intelligent design is William Paley. In his writings from the Natural Theology, he writes about this idea of a watchmaker and that design implies a designer (Paley 212). He uses the analogy of a watch to show that in order for a watch to work it needs to have a watchmaker or designer. He compares this to the idea of natural theology and how species are created through design and the lense of a designer. He writes, “by inspecting the the watch, even when standing still, we get proof of contrivance, and of a contriving mind having been employed by it” (Paley 212). He believes that neither mechanism, works of nature or intervention by second causes, can excuse the need of a designer in design (213). According to him, animals cannot change on their own and that therefore there needs to be a designer or maker of the universe because animals don’t have the ability to design their own limbs and senses (210). On the other hand, Darwin and Ayala believe that animals do have the ability to adapt and change on their own through survival of the fittest and passing off traits to offspring in the theory of …show more content…
Paley would use his analogy of the watchmaker and how in order for a watch to function there needed to be a watchmaker to make it work. Paley argues against the idea of chance in evolution. In this argument he talks about the evolution of the eye and how that couldn’t of possibly just been created through the process of natural selection. First the eye has a series of transparent lenses very different from the rest of the body (Ayala 2). The second point he makes is that the eye has a retina which is the only part of the body to be black and lastly the eye has a “large nerve communicating between this membrane [the retina] and the brain; without which, the oction of light upon the membrane would be lost to the purpose of sensation” (Ayala 2). Paley makes known the question of whether or not the eye could have been created through a naturalistic process without a designer or with a designer. He argued that the way the eye is created could not have happened without a designer because of how intricate it is as a part of the human body. This leads us back to the idea of the watch and how its parts are put together intricately for a purpose (Ayala 3). The way watches function is so intricate with the way the parts move and work together in a regulated pattern. This analogy leads us to believe that the possibility of the eye being
One big writer on the subject of intelligent design is William Paley. In his writings from the Natural Theology, he writes about this idea of a watchmaker and that design implies a designer (Paley 212). He uses the analogy of a watch to show that in order for a watch to work it needs to have a watchmaker or designer. He compares this to the idea of natural theology and how species are created through design and the lense of a designer. He writes, “by inspecting the the watch, even when standing still, we get proof of contrivance, and of a contriving mind having been employed by it” (Paley 212). He believes that neither mechanism, works of nature or intervention by second causes, can excuse the need of a designer in design (213). According to him, animals cannot change on their own and that therefore there needs to be a designer or maker of the universe because animals don’t have the ability to design their own limbs and senses (210). On the other hand, Darwin and Ayala believe that animals do have the ability to adapt and change on their own through survival of the fittest and passing off traits to offspring in the theory of …show more content…
Paley would use his analogy of the watchmaker and how in order for a watch to function there needed to be a watchmaker to make it work. Paley argues against the idea of chance in evolution. In this argument he talks about the evolution of the eye and how that couldn’t of possibly just been created through the process of natural selection. First the eye has a series of transparent lenses very different from the rest of the body (Ayala 2). The second point he makes is that the eye has a retina which is the only part of the body to be black and lastly the eye has a “large nerve communicating between this membrane [the retina] and the brain; without which, the oction of light upon the membrane would be lost to the purpose of sensation” (Ayala 2). Paley makes known the question of whether or not the eye could have been created through a naturalistic process without a designer or with a designer. He argued that the way the eye is created could not have happened without a designer because of how intricate it is as a part of the human body. This leads us back to the idea of the watch and how its parts are put together intricately for a purpose (Ayala 3). The way watches function is so intricate with the way the parts move and work together in a regulated pattern. This analogy leads us to believe that the possibility of the eye being