The Design Argument

Hume Anthropomorphism Criticism

Giving non-human things human traits. Why would an intelligent designer be intelligent/wise, and possess other human traits? How arrogant of us to treat the human mind as the model for the designer of the whole universe, and thereby of the universe itself!

FTA Criticism:

If the purposefulness and complexity of the universe are to be explained by citing a complex designer, surely the purposefulness and complexity of such a designer need to be explained. How we explain God? Swinburne claims theism allows us to explain the purposefulness and complexity of the universe, which nothing else can explain as well. If theism can't really explain God, then it hasn't really explained the set-up of the universe. Although science can't explain that either, there's one thing that science can't explain - the laws of physics and the nature of God.

The Anthropic Principle

'If the initial conditions had been different the universe would have been different. In any way it turned out would have been just as unlikely, the only difference being that there would have been no one around to be surprised" - Brandon Carter. Example: Winning the lottery is unlikely, and if you won you might think that it was God, but it was inevitable someone would win - just not you. This can be compared to our position in the universe, maybe there's lots of universes. Like the lottery winner saying 'why me', Swinburne argues God must have set up the universe with the intention that we would come to exist. This is misguided, as it's inevitable some life would exist, and they could all formulate a similar question. If it hadn't been us, we wouldn't have been here.

Hume Criticism From Design

'We have no experience of world making' meaning we can only regard something as designed if we have experience of objects of that sort being designed and manufactured'. As we don't, we can't infer that it was designed.

Argument For Design

1. We see in the universe the presence of certain special features, orderliness, regularity, etc. 2. These features, either collectively or individually, can't be adequately explained by natural sciences. 3. Presence of features can be made sense by God. 4. Where an explanation makes sense of certain features that cannot be accounted for by any other explanation, then we can conclude it's probably right. (Best explanation is whichever hypothesis best explains the data). 5, God exists.

Teleology

Any philosophical account that holds that final causes exist in nature, meaning that — analogous to purposes found in human actions — nature inherently tends toward definite ends.

Hume Criticism For Design

Appearances of design doesn't imply actual design. Snowflakes look designed, as do spider's webs - yet they aren't an intelligent designer. It's just as easy to assume that the universe might have been spun from the bowels of a giant spider.

Argument For Design

Demonstrates that living things have been designed by an intelligent designer, and are not simply the result of the improbable processes of evolution. Darwin admitted it seemed 'absurd in the highest degree,' that something as sophisticated as the eye could have evolved through natural selection.

Scientific Criticism For Design

Doesn't follow scientific methodology: No testing, no predictions based on theory.

Argument From Design:

Hume - 'The author of nature is somewhat similar to the mind of man, though possessed of much larger faculties, proportioned to the grandeur of the work which he's executed'. An analgoy says that A stand to B as C stands to D. 'Like effects have like causes'. Design for the world stands to a superior designer as human artefacts stand to human designers.

Swinburne Criticism

In Swinburne's argument, the explanation for the set-up of the physical universe is held to be God, God's existence and consciousness must be supposed not the require even the existence of the physical universe. The appeal to God implies that it's not true that the existence of life and requires the physical universe is set up just as it is. There's no need to explain why the physical universe is set up just as it is, in order to explain the existence of life and consciousness. Life and consciousness can exist under any condition.

Swinburne

It's more probable to assume that God designed the universe, than that he didn't. Since all scientific explanations must assume the laws of physics, there can be no scientific explanation of why the laws of physics are as they are. In order to explain why they're like this, one must transcend science. As there's no scientific explanation as to why the universe is such as to bring forth life, perhaps the best explanation is a personal one: The universe was designed with us in mind.

Behe Argument For Design

Mousetrap analogy - spring, catch, holding bar, base - if any parts were missing, it would fail to work - all parts must be in place as the designer designed it. Complex features needs all necessary parts. Can't be produced step by step. This is irreducible complexity.

Darwin's Behe Criticism

Partial sight is useful and gives evolutionary advantage over competitors who are unsighted. More chance of reproducing. Different animals have different sight for their environment. Explanation in evolution. Features change over time, such as the fins of fish evolve.

Fine Tuning Argument

Points out the improbability of the universe and life. If the Big Bang had changed by 10^60, there would be no stars, planet, no life. The existence can't be explained by saying that the Big Bang, the properties of matter-energy, laws of physics, etc. were all designed in order to allow life to emerge.

Paley Hume Counter

Such knowledge isn't required to notice something isn't designed. People recognise artefacts as designed objects.

Swinburne Dawkins Counter

Swinburne might say God is less complex than any non-theistic alternative.

Ockham's Razor:

The best explanation is the simplest, and it's simpler to posit one designer. Omnipotence is easier, as otherwise we have to explain what limits the designer has. Theism is the best explanation for the life-begetting set-up of the physical universe. It's the best as it's the simplest. I's also the personal explanation.

Dawkins FTA Criticism:

The designer of so complex a universe would himself need to be rather complex. Is this really conductive to simplicity?

Hume Counter Criticism

The spider has been designed by a desiigner, so as to create a web that has also been designed by that designer. Hume needs a plausible explanation of how things seem to be designed when they aren't. (NATURAL SELECTION √)

The Design Argument

The universe possess observable features that suggest it was designed by a divine designer - God. Therefore God exists.

Teleological Arguments

They're a posteriori, inductive (premises only make conclusion possible) arguments. They make general abservations about how the earth is so suitable for life, while they can't conclusively prove the existence of God even if it's based on true premises. 'The universe was designed by God' is a synthetic claim, as it's not true in virtue of the meanings of the words used to express it.

Hume Paley Counter Criticism

This only happens where we can compare the objects with objects that we know to have been designed. The universe in unique - nothing is like it, meaning it can't be compared to anything.

Darwin Criticism For Design

Undermines the argument through his work of natural selection. Darwin's origin of species provided an accoun of how such perfectly adapted features could and did come about, not by intelligent design, but by the struggle of every generation of species to compete, survive and reproduce. Darwin gives an alternative account of how design can appear. Random mutation + natural selection is the real designer - a blind unthinking mechanism.

Criticism of Arguments From Analogy

Watches are too dissimilar from the universe to justify the argument. Apart from the regularity and complexity, the universe is nothing like any machine we've encountered - it's far more natural - does it therefore make the universe a vegetable? As both work, it supports neither of them. It fails to establish the universe was designed as a machine was designed. Furthermore, the designer mightn't even be God - 'like effects have like causes' could make it seem the universe is designed by a team - undermining monotheism. Designers can also be foolish and morally weak, undermining theism, and some machines are the product of trial and error - but God is supposed to be omnipotent! You can't gather information about the skills of the designer, or the designer's careless ness and negligence. Thus the design faults evident in the universe, pain, suffering, mortality, natural disasters, etc. God's said to be the creator!

William Paley From Design

When we come across a watch, we know it's complex, harmonious, planned, and shows intelligence. It therefore must have an intelligent designer, as it's obvious. The universe displays many of the same design-like features as the watch, meaning it too must have a designer, and since the universe is infinite, the designer must be superior to the design of the watch.