What did Paley say about the watch?

Design argument (teleological argument) Paley used a watch to illustrate his point. If he came across a mechanical watch on the ground, he would assume that its many complex parts fitted together for a purpose and that it had not come into existence by chance. There must be a watchmaker.

What did Paley compare the watch to?

The ‘watch analogy’ from William Paley is an ‘a posteriori’ (based upon experience, as opposed to the use of logic) argument for the existence of God. The argument makes use of an anaology as Paley compares a watch and the Earth/universe.

What did Paley believe in?

Even though Paley’s concept of God as a designer is very different from Darwin’s theory of natural selection, Darwin took from his reading of Paley a belief in adaptation — that organisms are somehow fit for the environments in which they live, that their structure reflects the functions they perform throughout their …

What is Paley’s conclusion?

Paley’s analogy is this: Further, the design of the universe is far more wonderful than that of anything designed by humans, from which Paley concludes that the designer of the universe has to be of a far greater calibre than any human designer.

What is the watchmaker argument philosophy?

The watchmaker analogy or watchmaker argument is a teleological argument which states, by way of an analogy, that a design implies a designer, especially intelligent design by an intelligent designer, i.e. a creator deity.

What was William Paley known for?

William Paley was an English clergyman, Christian apologist, philosopher, and utilitarian. He is best known for his natural theology exposition of the teleological argument for the existence of God in his work Natural Theology or Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity.

Is Paley’s argument valid?

1 Graham Oppy, “Paley’s Argument for Design,” Philo 5 (2002): 161–73. 2 Ibid., 166–7. This argument is deductively valid; if (2) and (3) are both true, then (4) follows inescapably. (3) is clearly true; various parts of the natural world (for example, Oppy’s example of a rabbit’s heart3) do have a function.

Is Paley’s teleological argument deductive or inductive?

Almost all commentators suppose that Paley’s argument is an inductive argument—either an argument by analogy or an argument by inference to the best explanation. I contend, on the contrary, that Paley’s argument is actually a straightforwardly deductive argument.

Who is the thinker of the analogy of the watchmaker?

William Paley
The watchmaker analogy was given by William Paley in his 1802 book Natural Theology or Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity.

What is Paley’s watch maker argument?

Paley’s watch maker argument – an argument for the existence of God by the clearly apparent design in nature is one of the most powerful arguments for God’s existence. How do I know?

Does this attempt to debunk Paley’s argument represent the argument accurately?

So right off the bat we see this attempt to debunk Paley’s does not represent the argument accurately according to Christian presentations as elaborated above. Moving on he keeps referring to the argument as an “analogy” which, as I’ve already pointed out is incorrect.

What is Paley’s counter-objection to the natural process?

Counter-objection: (1) Paley’s response is an ad hominem. (2) It is the nature of the human mind to impose order on things whether or not order is actually present. In order to understand a natural process, a preliminary or conventional order is often arbitrarily imposed.

Were living beings designed to resemble watches?

William Paley, in his classic work, Natural Theology: or, Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity, argued that living beings resembled watches (as opposed to stones) and so, were probably designed. Here is his original argument: