After reading AC’s post about the Argument by Design versus two other arguments for the existence of God, I thought today I would talk more in depth about the Argument by Design by referencing my starting point: Paley, “The Argument by Design”.
The first premise is that every mechanism has a creator. What I mean by this is that every machine must have had a maker, someone who designed the machine and formed the parts in such a way that it serves the purpose for which it was created. Sound agreeable right? When you see the George Washington Bridge you know that it did not just create itself, or exist forever there. You know that the bridge had a creator, in this case an architect, who designed the bridge for the purpose of allowing traffic to travel across the Hudson river.
The second premise is that nature is machine. Now think about the bridge again, you agreed that it was created by an architect so that it could support such and such amount of weight over such and such amount of distance and I’m sure several other factors. Thus, through observation you realize that the bridge has varying beams and angles that the architect intentionally put together so that the bridge could serve it’s purpose as a machine. Well, does nature not have as complex, if not more complex, a design? Does it not operate as a machine does? If you’ve taken early biology or ecology courses you’ve learned about symbiotic relationships and many different natural cycles so from a big picture view doesn’t it appear that nature has a kind of clockwork itself that would make it a machine.
Therefore, if you accept the two premises nature has a creator.
So this fundamental argument will continue to be explored and critiqued throughout the coming weeks but I hope this was a good introduction to the Argument by Design,