StudyBoss » Charles Darwin » Essay on Paleys Argument For The Existence Of Intelligent Design

Essay on Paleys Argument For The Existence Of Intelligent Design

Most people observe the world and conclude that there is no doubt an order and design. One such believer was philosopher William Paley, an 18th century English clergymen who concluded that there was an intelligent design of the universe and thus must exist an intelligent designer. Now a commonly used term amongst theologists and philosophers, intelligent design refers to the belief that certain features of the universe can best be explained by a higher cause.

While an orderly universe created for man-kind may be the more popular and optimistic opinion, I see disorder and chaos every where I look. From early on in life, I have always seen the world as a place that needs structure brought to it, not something with an innate organization. My color coded filing system, countless sticky notes (all shapes and sizes), and embarrassingly high-tech label maker are all proof of my attempts to find an intelligent order this universe has failed to provide me with.

While a more commonly held opinion is that of William Paley in saying that intelligent design is the force behind the innate configuration of this universe, I disagree with both intelligent design and the existence of any such favorable order in this world, and instead side with philosopher Neil DeGrasse Tyson and his ideas of universal disarray and chaos. What would you think if you came across a perfectly crafted watch in the middle of the dessert?

Philosopher William Paley asked himself the same question and came to the elaborate conclusion of a teleological argument for the existence of an intelligent designer and the order of the universe. In his book, Natural Theology, Paley points out that the complexity of the randomly placed watch proves that there must exist a watch maker. He then makes the connection that the watch and its complexity are synonymous to the universe and it’s supposed design. By this opinion, he concludes that the watch is to a watchmaker as the universe is to a universe maker.

Citing the similarities between the watch and the universe, Paley notes that, “Every indication of contrivance, every manifestation of design, which existed in the watch, exists in the works of nature; with the difference, on the side of nature, of being greater or more, and that in a degree which exceeds all computation. ” (Paley 31). Just as the watch is designed for a specific purpose and audience, the universe according to Paley is very specifically crafted. He identifies the natural world as having a “greater or more” organization to it.

Paley makes several good points, and recognizes and debunks flaws in his argument, including why the watch (universe) may sometimes not work. However, while I agree that there does appear to be an order in the way the universe works; the consistent rotation of the planets, the timely seasons, and the regular tides, the flaw in Paley’s argument is that he insists on an intelligent order. There is no doubt an organization in the animal kingdom, and a hierarchy of the food chain, but this does not reduce the harshness of the universe in the least bit.

Paley may have won the argument of recognizing an evolutionary order in this world, but his fatal flaw is ignoring the daily adaptations necessary to survive here. The structure of this world is not designed for us. It has been crafted over billions of years of evolutionary adaption, and will continue to change. Paley’s theory can account for why the sun graces us with its rise and fall each day, but for me this small favor cannot make up for the disease, winds, rains, and countless other factors attempting to kill us each day. Human beings are an ignorant and prideful species.

We tend to think that everything that happens is about us, that each insult thrown our way holds a higher meaning, and that we are entirely superior to any other species. Along these lines, the assumption that the order of the world was intelligently designed for our very existence, despite the presence of millions of other species, is simply naive. Human beings can drown, unlike sea animals. Human beings cannot scale rocks, unlike some mountain goats or mammals. Human beings cannot deposit venom from their teeth to kill prey, unlike hundreds of species of spiders or snakes. The list of flaws against the human species extends forever.

Perhaps the largest flaw, however, is that we can often not accept defeat. As Neil DeGrasse Tyson, a modern astrophysicist, argues, scientists turn towards a God or intelligent designer as the explanation of the natural world only when they can simply not explain the given phenomenon. Tyson, a scientist himself, recognizes the tendency of scientists to “appeal to a higher power only when staring into the ocean of their own ignorance. ” (Tyson). Tysons argument is often referred to as “God of the gaps. ” This phrase refers to the fact that each gap in science, otherwise void of information, is filled in by saying that God must be responsible.

I find Tysons viewpoint to be entirely more realistic and refreshing than Paley’s. Using Tysons’ methodology, the assumption that the universe has been designed intelligently came only after the scientific world was unable to account for the apparent “order”. The universe is in fact not favorably created. It appears as such because of the modern and technological capabilities of the human species. There no doubt exists a number of apparent holes in my argument. While offering up a counter to his point, Paley writes, “It is not necessary that a machine be perfect, in order to show with what design it was made:” (Paley 11).

While this counter would hold true if the world occasionally fell into chaos, a study released by by United Nations recently released evidence of not only an increase in natural disasters per year and their strength, but also an increase in the death toll as a result of these disasters. The research had proof of over six hundred thousand deaths by natural disasters in the past twenty years, and predicted being unaware of hundreds of thousands more. In addition, the U. N. predicted over four billion displaced or injured people due to these natural disasters.

These numbers are not mall; the world is constantly breaking away from it’s “order” and attempting to kill its very inhabitants. When scientists came to understand the way that the tides worked, ebbing and flowing in response to the moon, they were thrilled. However, a tsunami soon hit… and left without answers, they named God as the planner. Let’s say for a moment that there is in fact an intelligent designer, God or something else, behind this world and its events. Why would a higher being, especially one that promises unconditional love, subject the earth to such horrific disasters?

Some people may say that I am ignoring the uncommon natural acts that don’t bring chaos, but instead beauty and rarity. They may point to the beauty of the northern lights, or the rarity of being able to see five different planets on one night. However, these events are just that… a rarity. Disaster strikes each and every day. Even more often that disaster is able to come to completion, the human species overcomes or avoids it with modern capabilities and adaptation. Hurricane bunkers, storm shutters, even air conditioning all protect us from normally dangerous occurrences.

At its core, this universe is not designed for us, and proves only compatible with human life after intervention. What this argument really comes down to is a much more specific sub genre of the debate between religion and science. A purely scientific view is to look at the universe, and using specific observations, recognize that there is an order of evolution and adaptation, but that this order is no more designed for us than it is for a mouse. A religious view is to look at the universe, be awed by it’s complexity and beauty, somewhat ignore the disorderly events, and give a higher power credit for so carefully designing a world for us.

Yes… it is far more comforting to believe in a higher being looking out for us, planning and plotting each event that rattles us. Certainly Paley and countless religions have been solaced by this idea. However, with the next natural disaster spiraling towards us at an even faster rate than the last one, it may be time to recognize that we live in a universe of chaos. Regardless of how orderly that chaos is on the outside, it contains an unimaginable power to destroy us all. Not only is forgetting that a grave under appreciation for this powerful natural world, it is a mistake that could cost you your life.

Cite This Work

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:

Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.