Teleological arguments for God’s existence Chapter 5 Teleological arguments for God’s existence

Teleological argument Derived from the Greek terms telos (end or goal) and logos (reason or rational account). First developed by ancient Greek and Indian philosophers, the argument takes a variety of forms. The common theme among them all is that the means/ends order which exists in the natural world is best explained by purposeful design.

William Paley’s design argument Artifacts (such as a watch), with their means to ends configurations, are the products of (human)design Works of nature, such as the human hand, resemble artifacts Thus, the works of nature are probably the products of design Furthermore, the works of nature are numerous and complex Therefore, the works of nature were probably produced by a grand designer – one much more powerful and intelligent than a human designer

Objections Hume Darwin The analogy used is not strong The world is finite and defective, so the Designer must be The universe might be the result of mere chance Darwin Evolution Living organisms are the products of natural processes, not of a Designer

A fine-tuning argument Robin Collins argues that cosmic constants of the cosmos seem to be “balanced on a razor’s edge” for the existence of life: The strength of the big bang The strength of the strong nuclear force The strength of gravity The size of the neutron The strength of the electromagnetic force

The fine-tuning argument The fine-tuning of the universe happened either by chance, necessity, or intelligent design The fine-tuning of the universe did not happen by chance or necessity Therefore, the fine-tuning of the universe happened by intelligent design

Objections The many universe hypothesis The weak anthropic principle Our universe – one of many – is fortuitously life- permitting The weak anthropic principle We should not be surprised that the universe is life-permitting; we could not come to this realization of it were not Who designed the Designer? The mind of the Designer must display the evidences of design as well, and so would need an explanation

The intelligent design argument If the universe is complex and specified, then it is reasonable to conclude that it is the result of design The universe is complex and specified Thus, it is reasonable to conclude that the universe is the result of design Dembski Explanatory filter Specified complexity Behe Irreducible complexity Mousetrap analogy Bacterial flagellum

Objections The intelligent design argument rests on contentious philosophical assumptions rather than on scientific inference Challenges to alleged examples of irreducible complexity

Questions for discussion Does it make sense to affirm the existence of a grand intelligent designer of the universe given that much of what we find on planet earth, for example, does not seem to reflect “optimal design”? Explain your answer. Create your own argument from analogy. What are its strengths? What are its weaknesses? Do these strengths and weaknesses apply to the design argument from analogy? Are evolution and creation(design) compatible? Explain your answer.