William Paley set out to create a logical argument called “The Watchmaker Argument” which proves the existence of a creator, and therefore, the existence of God. In “Natural Theology”, Paley argues that due to the complex nature and resemblance of purpose in reality, the universe must have had a creator. Paley’s argument would seem to make sense, however, when put under modern day scrutiny, it does not hold up to the degree that it was originally intended to. Throughout this essay, I will argue that Paley’s watchmaker analogy is not a logical argument by pointing out the major flaws contained in it, and how they coexist to prove the argument is false. I will firstly give a quick overview of my argument, followed by Paley’s argument for reference. …show more content…
To begin with, Paley’s watchmaker argument contains a major Fallacy of composition. Paley explains: “Every indicator of contrivance … which existed in the watch, exists in the works of nature”.6 This statement infers that like a watch, nature exhibits the same complexity and perceived purpose, and therefore, like a watch, must require a designer. This statement is completely invalid as it assumes because the individual parts of a watch are made for a purpose and are complex, so to must the parts of the universe, and therefore the universe has a creator, which is extremely irrational.
Secondly, the watchmaker argument, in its entirety, is a false cause fallacy (post hoc, ergo propter hoc). Paley correctly argues that as a watch is complex it needs a creator. Where he makes an error is when he states because the universe is much more complex, it also must have a more powerful creator. This is incorrect, as it is not logically sound to suggest that just because the universe is complex, it requires a creator. The presumption is as follows: Watch > complex > creator = nature > complex > creator. The argument incorrectly assumes that if a creator came before the universe, he must have created it, which is a false cause
In fact however, Paley was not talking about a watch. Paley was talking about the universe, with the watch as a metaphor. The universe is obviously much more complex than a watch and they both serve a purpose. The gears in the watch function to tell us time. He also listed a supernatural being as the creator of the makings of the “Watch,” that every living thing, rock, drop of water, and the heavens above were created by a supernatural, all seeing being. Though Paley never says that the “creator” is God, one can assume according to other people’s perspectives that the creator would be, and that the pieces of nature were the equivalent of the parts of a watch that keep it ticking and combining in effort to contribute to a bigger purpose. This bigger purpose however is needing the efforts of those below it, or else nothing else would work, as stated by Paley.
It is evident that McCloskey’s arguments in an attempt to disprove the existence of God lacks evidence. He disputes the existence of God based on a lack of undisputable evidence, but he provides no undisputable evidence to counter this existence. He dismisses the idea of a creator by theory of evolution. Although he may have a valid argument for evolution he still does not account for the start of the world. Everything must come from something. The cause cannot be unlimited, there was a cause that had to be free of all other causes, and this points us to creation.
The ability to compare the universe to a watch allows for familiarity, which is what I believe draws agreement and acknowledgement of his argument. It is thought that, as humans, we have at least one person in existence that is aware of how to put together a properly functioning watch, and we know that a watch needs to be put together intelligently. Given Paley’s reasoning he presents that the world is also intricately made which creates a parallel between a watch in the universe, giving individuals a sense of familiarity. As such, it naturally follows that there ought to be a universe maker, or God, who appears to be the only one capable of doing such a thing. Primarily, my concern is that the intelligent maker must be God; Paley merely assumes that the reader agrees and gives no further insight on why the creator must be God. Furthermore, he assumes the universe works without proof or any real knowledge which seems a rather fatal flaw. It is irresponsible to believe that the universe works the way we assume to fulfill our desire to explain the existence of God, similar to Mackie’s objection to the cosmological argument (Mackie 171). I do not believe Paley’s argument survives Hume’s objection due to the necessity of experience. He merely uses analogy to justify his claim; the only difference is that he has experience with a watch and none in regards to the universe. Again, he is
Ms. Nelle Lee is the author of “To kill a Mockingbird” which is a very famous 20th century novel. Recently “Go Set a Watchman” which is a sequel to her previous book was controversially published. Lee is very old and in bad health. Some people believe she never wanted “Go set a Watchman” published. Other people thought that she did want this book published. One of these people is her lawyer Tonja Carter. Carter is the spokesperson for Ms. Lee since Lee is mostly deaf and blind. The people who believe Lee did not want this book published believe Carter is manipulating her in order to make more money off the new book. To answer the question of “Should the publisher have published the book?” I will rely on Joseph L. Badaracco Jr.’s Defining Moments
The teleological argument begins by stating a special kind of argument, an a posteriori argument. An a posteriori argument is an argument based on the knowledge of experiences encountered in the world. For Paley, the a posteriori argument is established as he imagines himself nature walking, only to stumble upon a watch: a pocket watch, whose function is made visible through a transparent glass and made possible through gears and springs. Paley retrieves the watch and questions how such an object came to be in the middle of vegetation and is easily intrigued to reflect about the nature of the watch. Let us reflect about the physical attributes of the watch. Imagine for a second that the body of the watch was covered in highly polished gold metal and in the middle of its body laid a transparent glass. The glass lets us see two disproportionate metallic rods whose ends are encrusted with small diamonds. Apart from ...
In very complex machines, missing or undiscovered parts are more likely to arise; yet, such disorder would no doubt make an individual more curious as to the objects purpose. Although in some cases, a part may seem useless, the individual would continue to question and wonder what purpose that part serves. No one could believe that the watch was assembled together with sheer luck; therefore, an intelligent designer exists. The watch is definitely not made by the principle of order and it is not believable to say or think that the watch was not invented. Design cannot exist without the designer. Every appearance of design, which exists in the watch, exists in the works of nature. While the world is far more complex than a simplistic instrument, like a watch, it is no different when compared at the base levels, especially when seeing that both are so mechanical, showing elements of order.
Gender relations and differences have been a part of society since the birth of civilization. Gender relations in the past have been mainly dominated by men. In Shakespeare’s Hamlet, women are lower that men. Women are never really apart of the play and when they are a part of the play, they are usually expressing stereotypical women behavior. In Kesey’s One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, women are mainly expressed overpowering men. Both pieces include patriarchal elements. Kesey and Shakespeare use various stereotypical female characters as a metaphor for the different roles that women have in society, to express the views society holds on these roles.
The Teleological argument, given by William Paley in 1802 states that there is a “Designing Creator”, and that everything in this world has been designed to fulfill some sort of function. He bases this argument using a traditional time piece, a watch, as an analogy. Paley states that the watch, unlike a stone or a rock, could not have been placed or created by accident, and that the existence of a watch is proof that there must be a watchmaker. He compares this watch to the existence of the universe, stating that the universe itself is proof that there is some sort of designer present, and like a watch (but unlike a rock or stone) could not have been created by accident. He then continues to state that further evidence of a God can be found in the supposed “regularity” of the universe. Paley claims that due to the universe behaving in a very apparent manner, while retaining boundaries (Newtons laws of motion, etc) that this is a very apparent display of a God having rule over a very mechanical universe. Now Darwin on the other hand was a large
Everybody wants to be accepted, yet society is not so forgiving. It bends you and changes you until you are like everyone else. Society depends on conformity and it forces it upon people. In Emerson's Self Reliance, he says "Society is a joint stock company, in which the members agree, for the better securing of his bread to each shareholder, to surrender the liberty and culture of the eater." People are willing to sacrifice their own hopes and freedoms just to get the bread to survive. Although the society that we are living in is different than the one the Emerson's essay, the idea of fitting in still exists today. Although society and our minds make us think a certain way, we should always trust our better judgment instead of just conforming to society.
After Sir Charles Darwin had introduced his original theory about the origins of species and evolution, humanity’s faith in God that remained undisputed for hundreds of years had reeled. The former unity fractured into the evolutionists, who believed that life as we see it today had developed from smaller and more primitive organisms, and creationists, who kept believing that life in all its diversity was created by a higher entity. Each side introduced substantial arguments to support their claims, but at the same time the counter-arguments of each opponent are also credible. Therefore, the debates between the evolutionists and the creationists seem to be far from ending. And though their arguments are completely opposite, they can co-exist or even complement each other.
He had two different approaches to how the universe was created. Paley compared a watched the way the universe, he thought the world was like a machine it must have a des... ... middle of paper ... ... nthropic Principle’ believed that ‘Nature produces living beings but with fine tuning that is found in the universe; life could just as easily not developed into earth’ I think that this quote is trying to say that the universe has been developed by evolution and was created by God, a designer.
When the landmark judgment was passed in favor of the plaintiff in the Dover case, it seemed to deal a huge blow to the teleological argument for the existence of God. To some, this was the final nail in God’s coffin; yet to many, it was the beginning of a new phase in the discussion on the origins of life and a great challenge to the traditionally accepted view on the Darwinian theory of evolution. This document seeks to highlight the objections that have been systematically raised against Intelligent Design and expose the flaws in these objections.
William Paley develops his view of the design argument through an example of a wristwatch. He has the reader imagine themselves coming across a watch on the ground. He then asks the reader how they think the watch came to be there or came to exist in the first place. Looking at the watch, Paley says that one will notice the intricate design of the watch and notice that all the parts were put together in such a way to serve a purpose, namely, to tell time. Paley believes that from looking at the watch we will be lead to think that the watch has a clever designer. The watch displays a certain evidence of its own design.
Dr. William Lane Craig supports the idea of existence of God. He gives six major arguments, in order to defend his position. The first argument is quite fare, Craig says that God is the best reason of existence of everything. He gives the idea, that the debates between all the people, cannot reach the compromise, because the best explanation of the reasons of existence of everything is God, and nothing can be explained without taking Him into consideration. The second argument of Craig is from a cosmological point of view: he says that the existence of the universe is the best proof of the existence of God. Because, the process of the creation of the universe is so ideally harmonious, that it seems impossible to appear accidentally. The third argument is about the fine tuning of the universe. The universe is designed in such a way that people always have aim of life, and the life of people and the nature are interconnected. The fourth argument of Dr. Craig is about the morality: God is the best explanation of the existence of the morality and moral values in people’s lives. The...
Paley’s analogy came about from the concept of a stone. He encountered this stone during his walk and wondered how it came about (Paley, 1802, 196). He applies the idea that since a designer must have created this stone, this designer must have created other things just like how a watch is created by a watchmaker. His analogy for a watch and its watch maker becomes his key argument because he argues that you cannot come to a conclusion that a stone was formed by a natural process, just like how when you look at a watch it has a watchmaker (Paley, 1802, 96). When comparing it to a stone, Paley says someone must have created it.