The Clock without a Maker There are a many great questions in life in which people have asked themselves. Who are we? What is the meaning of life? Where do come from? This paper will be undertaking the latter of these queries. In the grand debate over human origins there are two prevailing theories; one in which mankind and biological world was birthed from the mind of an intelligent designer, this is commonly known as the Teleological Argument, and the other simply being the contradictory in which no suck designer currently or has ever existed insinuating that in fact random occurrence was the cause of life, informally known as the skeptic s rebuttal. Proceeding through this paper I shall be siding with side of the skeptic s viewpoint and provide evidence and reason in which to refute the Teleological Argument by way of describing each its premises in detail and thoroughly breaking down and refuting them based upon views of my own and those of past philosophers. Among the three of major arguments advocating the theological view of the typical western Judeo-Christian God, them being the Cosmological, Ontological, and Teleological arguments, the Teleological Argument doesn t necessarily argue for God in the general sense in which he is known but for the existence of an intelligent designer who as the title describes an intelligent being of unknown origin design the humans and the biological world around them on the basis that the biological creatures seen in nature are so adapted and well equipped for their natural environment that such an occurrence could only transpire due to the will of an intelligent designer. One of the most prominent proponents of the Teleological Argument was William Paley, British philosopher, in his work Natural Theology Paley he details his premises in favor of the Teleological Argument. The best summary of Paley s points comes from himself actually in a metaphor he provided in his aforementioned essay. Paley states, and I m paraphrasing, that when you look at a pocket watch, really eyeing the intricate detail of its design, one does not assume
that such a intelligently designed product could have simply come to be from nothing, appearing out of thin air; for such a thought is ludicrous as we known that artisan is behind such craftsmanship. Paley applies this same analogy to the natural world, in how something as complicated, say the human eye for example couldn t have randomly came to be but was the result of intelligent design on the behalf of an intelligent designer. When it comes to arguments there are two distinct types, argument by analogy and argument by best explanation, and operate in how their names imply. Arguments by analogy make the assumption that if 2 things haves some properties in common then they likely have others in common as well; for example, if object 1 has x and y and object 2 has x, then it could be assumes that since both objects share x they must also share y in common. On the other end is the argument of best explanation, and as the name states this argument relies on choosing the best explanation which support your premises though keeping in mind that such conclusion is simply and is consistent with already established knowledge. Given this information it can be concluded that the Teleological Argument would have to fall into one of these argumentative categories, and for which it is allotted into is determined by the way in which it presents its case. The Teleological argument is broken down into two main premises, the first being that all biological life on earth is perfectly adapted for it environment; pattern, order, and superb design are present throughout the biological world. This is in reference to natural systems, such as the earlier example given with the human eye, and how such complexities could have only of occurred from the mind of an intelligent designer. The second premise of the Teleological Argument ties into the aforementioned query as to which category the argument falls into, for through the second premise the conclusion is drawn that the only reasonable explanation for the existence of such complex systems and structures in nature is that they themselves are product of
an intelligent designer, this of course revealing that the Teleological is one based upon the best explanation argumentative reasoning strategy. Paley supports this premise through his now famous watch analogy, mentioned above, and applying it towards the universe itself and how it could have only have been conceived by an intelligent designer due to its inherent complexity. Paley even goes further, in his work Natural Theory, as to say that humans specifically contain a plethora of complex systems that they truly could of come about from an intelligent designer equally as wise as is the human body is complex, meaning that such a designer would be so smart that it would be beyond human comprehension. Given what the synopsis of the Teleological Argument and Paley s various supporting evidence towards it, let s move on and take a new upon the skeptical views towards Paley proposal. First among the skeptics to take up the proverbial mantle against the Teleological Arguments was David Hume, a great British philosopher. He challenged specifically the second premise s grounds of the best explanation as to the origin of such well designed biological life, that of course being an intelligent designer. Now Hume didn t exactly challenge the existence of an intelligent designer per say, but instead questioned if the intelligent designer could accurately be interpreted to be what is thought of as being traditional Judeo-Christian God, and whether or not it would possess the traits of such. Hume goes about giving counter examples towards this claim in the ways such as this singular intelligent designer could be actually in fact be a committee of designers, the thought to be intelligent designer is actually inept and simply copied the design from another god, the designer of this universe could in truth be a lesser god or servant of a powerful one who was tasked with its creation, these and various other counter example to Paley s claim was made following the same logic of the three mentioned above. Though Hume skeptical proposal doesn t actual topple the Teleological argument, actually it
doesn t even claim denial into the possibility of some form of intelligent design by a designer(s), he even acknowledges this himself stating that he merely prods at the argument through semantical trickery. Not until the mid-19 th century did an actual legitimate counterpoint/ challenge towards the Teleological Argument presented itself, in the form of the now famous evolutionist Charles Darwin, in his 1859 s Origin of Species. Through his observations on the Galapagos islands Darwin concluded that life as we now know it came about through processes called natural selection and random mutation, states that when a biological life came about and continuous on is due to the random occurrence of mutations within a population and are naturally selected members of said population during breeding if it proves beneficial towards the increased survival of the offspring and in turn the species. This theory directly challenges Paley s second premise of the best explanation as it goes on to say that the biological world as we now know it was actually designed by an all-powerful individual but in fact came about through complete random occurrence. This this theory of evolution founded upon Darwin s observational findings is widely held in the scientific community to actually be the best explanation for it adheres more closely to the arguments guidelines, for it is considered a simpler explanation as to life s beginning in contrast to the thought of an all-powerful and ever being designer and it better follows current knowledge of today s natural world as the thought of change over time over millions of years seems more plausible to most. Based upon the aforementioned argument both for and against the Teleological Argument I would have to side with the skeptic argument due to the finding Darwin and others that followed it helped paint a more vivid picture of process in which life has come to be and even filling in any gaps along the way. But moreover I m skeptical of Paley s premises, with the first being inherently flawed for no life on earth is a recipient of superb design in fact I would even
argue the many if not all biological life suffers from subpar design for many biological systems could be greatly improved and serve no purpose, such as the pain experienced during human child birth and the uselessness of the appendix. Now this contradiction is not unheard of, Paley even responds towards them by stating more or less something to the effect of, that all design is to have flaw even with most great designers, but the counterpoint to this is that how can a designer who is intelligent and so beyond mankind how could it allow such flaws to occur leading to the assumption, much like Hume s earlier contradictory examples, the designer is inept. My last nitpick which I find in the actual evidence Paley uses in support of the second premise, his watch allegory, is that how could this analogy using human intelligence of comparison between object possible be applied towards something which he perceives to be so none human. Work Citied By ", Steven Pinker, Professor of Psychology at. "William Paley, "The Teleological Argument"" William Paley, "The Teleological Argument" Philosopher Lander.edu, 30 Oct. 2012. Web. 20 Sept. 2016. Paley, William. "Natural Theology and Tracts." (1824): 1-9. Purdue Online Database. Web. 20 Sept. 2016.