The Design Argument Analysis

1191 Words 5 Pages
The Design Argument is used as argument for God’s existence. It states that the universe as we know it, is comprised of complexity, and complex things do not solely come in to being, but must have been intelligently designed. If the universe and its components are complex, there must be someone that intelligently designed them, therefore, there must be a designer and that must be God. The design argument can be understood as being an argument for the existence of God and it achieves this by being an inductive argument from analogy. We make an analogy between how things exist with intricate details in nature and that complex composition along with intelligent design are required for the Design Argument for God. The most notable proponent of …show more content…
In the book, Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, we learn of four major criticisms to Paley’s design argument. The first, is the Weak Analogy criticism which basically argues that Paley’s inferences are too subtle to be valid and that one cannot simply put two different things together and call them the same. Criticism number two is considered the Design Mimickers. This criticism makes a case for other causes of design and suggests that we may simply be the product of “generation” or evolution. The next criticism is that of “Who Designed the Designer?” I feel that this is the strongest case that can be made against Paley’s argument for the existence of God. This criticism is strong because it addresses the belief that everything must come from somewhere, therefore, where does God originate from? We cannot simply exclude God from this, and we must conclude that even the creator has a …show more content…
For example, it is true that we do not know the true nature of God. If there is a God, we do not know what their intentions are or what they are made of. It seems that God was put in place to answer the questions we don’t have the answer to. It seems that when humans don’t understand something, they make up “a God” as an answer. Paley’s argument is rather weak because it takes simple unrelated connections and makes analogies from them. Hulme does have a stronger argument, but God can still be considered a better cause for our existence than chance. Simply put, evolution itself cannot account for our

Related Documents