Paley's Argument For The Existence Of God

The philosophy of religion is and always has been a very interesting topic. The existence of God has been debated since the beginning of history and is still debated to this day. Many very influential people have shared their thoughts and arguments to this popular debate. Of these influential thinkers are William Paley and Roger White. Paley, a British thinker living in the late 1700s, believed since that the world appeared to be “created” then it must have been created by a higher power. Many people thought and still think that this argument is valid. White on the other hand, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, has a different view on theism. He states that since our world is life permitting, there must be a higher

power that allowed life to be possible. Both of these ideas are valid arguments on the debate of the existence of God and should be considered greatly before taking a stance on the issue.
As mentioned earlier, both of these men stated very compelling arguments on the existence of God.

Paley presents his argument by using an analogy. In his paper titled “The Argument from Design”, he tells his readers to imagine a watch. He then says that since the watch has so many complex and interconnected components, that there is has to be someone who created it. This person would be a watchmaker. Paley then uses this same logic when thinking about nature. He basically says that there is no way that the earth could have been created without a creator. Therefore, there must be a “divine watchmaker” or a God. He compares eyeballs of humans to the complicated mechanisms within a watch. Paley simply could not believe that these “things” could just appear. In his example he refers to a number of “things”, such as the human eye. He said that the eye has such a purpose, and is designed so specifically that something must have created it. He believed that a higher power must have created these

things.
Paley extended his argument to say that the more detail in the object or being, the more God cared for it. Since some plants are so detailed and appear to be extremely thought out, that must mean that God spent more time considering their make-up and thus cares for these things more than simple things such as a rock. He also states that since the human species is so complex, that God cared even more for our race than others.
Paley anticipated many objections that his argument created and tried to settle in his initial argument. One of these objections that he did not anticipate however was Darwinism. Darwinism is the theory of evolution by natural selection. This idea explains why living things are so well fit for their environments. Although this dismisses a portion of Paley’s argument, it does not invalidate the idea as a whole. Since science has proved that evolution is real, Paley’s argument of a divine creator is dismissed. But Darwinism explains how living things advance and change over time. This theory does not explain the emergence of life and therefore Paley’s theory of a divine creator is still somewhat valid. If Paley were still alive today to argue against Darwin’s theory, he would surely agree with evolution but he would most likely ask where did the first life form stem from? He would argue that is contained “apparent design” and then state that it most likely was created by a higher power (Rosen, Byrne, Cohen, Shiffrin 33).
As previously mentioned, Roger White, a present day MIT professor, has a different view on theism. In his paper, “The Argument from Cosmological Fine-Tuning”, White states that since the earth is so fine-tuned for life to exist on it, the best explanation available to us now is that God must have created it. White explains this theory by saying the following. “If a fact E that we observe stands in need of explanation, and hypothesis H provides a satisfactory explanation of E that is better than any alternative explanation available, then E provides significant evidential support for H.” (Rosen, Byrne, Cohen, Shiffrin 44) Since no one else can provide a better alternative explanation for the creation of the universe, God creating it is the only viable explanation.
White goes on to create a comparison to make his point clearer. He tells the reader to imagine alphabet tiles scattered on a table. They read: “ANOW AWNVIUUEPOBN VNJSKNVJKEWN AJKFN.” He says that since these letters are in such a random and unorganized order, that they mean nothing. He then states that the letters can be arranged into an order that reads a line from the Shakespeare play Hamlet: “O THAT THIS TOO TOO SOLID FLESH WOULD MELT THAW AND RESOLVE ITSELF INTO A DEW.” If someone were to throw these tiles onto a table a million times, they would still most likely not read into the second phrase. Using this logic he is saying that yes, nature had the capabilities for life the same way that the tiles had the capabilities to form a logical statement. But without an “arranger” who had the knowledge to place the tiles in a logical order, they would have never been able to create the sentence that makes sense. Therefore since the earth is arranged in a way that allows life, there must have been a higher power that arranged it that way.
With both arguments on the table, it seems that White’s is stronger than Paley’s.

While it is hard to dismiss Paley’s idea of a “divine creator”, the logic in White’s argument seems is stronger for a number of reasons. One being is that Paley believed that God created each individual thing separately. Using Darwin’s theory, which is accepted science in today’s word, this is disproved. Darwinism has proved that animals and plants have evolved and adapted over time through natural selection. This means when a living thing has a favorable trait, over time this trait will become standard. An example of this in nature is the opposable thumb on humans. This feature allows humans to easily grasp objects. Humans, who evolved from primates, gained this trait over time. Therefore, God did not specifically design humans like Paley claims he

did.
Another reason that White’s argument is stronger than Paley’s is that it is much more scientific. While Paley does present a logical point with the watchmaker theory, White uses a more scientific and mathematical approach to portray his argument. Not to fault Paley however, because some of the information that White uses was simply unavailable during Paley’s lifetime. White uses mathematics and basic statistics to demonstrate to his readers how unlikely it would be for life to exist without an external “arranger.” He does this by using the alphabet tiles example. When it comes to an argument like the existence of God, statistical examples like White does, it is easier for one to side with him. These reasons are more convincing than Paley’s “divine creator” theory.
Paley and White both present very viable explanations for their arguments. Although it is over two-hundred years old, it is easy to understand why we still talk about Paley’s theory. It makes perfect sense, even to this day. White, having more information available to him, makes a better argument however. The various examples that he describes makes it very hard not to side with him. White takes account of all the necessary conditions that life needs to exist. He then realizes how unlikely it would be for these specific conditions to be the exact amount for life to exist. It comes down to how “fine-tuned” the earth is for life to exist. God must have made these factors this way.