More handpicked essays just for you.
Nature and nurture the development of intelligence
Nature and nurture the development of intelligence
Nature and nurture the development of intelligence
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
William Paley begins his “Argument from Design” by enumerating key differences between two obviously dissimilar objects—a stone and a watch. For the sake of meaningful contrast, Paley emphasizes three distinguishing properties lacked by the former and possessed by the latter. In this paper I will introduce these properties and explain how Paley uses one of them to argue that the watch necessitates an intelligent designer. From there I will explain how he ultimately formulates his argument for the existence of God.
Paley observes the first distinguishing feature of the watch to be its possession of complex, moveable parts. He lists some of these parts—a cylindrical box, an elastic spring, a flexible chain, a series of wheels, an index, and
…show more content…
In Phase I of his argument, Paley asserts—via syllogism—that an object, such as a watch, must entail an intelligent designer. To do this he employs an inference to the best explanation, or a “best-fit” reason assigned to the seemingly inexplicable phenomenon. Phase II is an argument by analogy, or an argument made by assuming that because two things share similar qualities, they likely share other qualities as well. Here, Paley seeks to prove that because a watch and the Universe share notable common characteristics, they also share the characteristic of having an intelligent designer. He expands this theory to infer that the creator of the Universe is …show more content…
By utilizing a somewhat simple syllogism, Paley is able to link the possession of teleology to an intelligent designer. His chain of reasoning consists of two crucial premises—1) that functionality implies purposefulness and 2) that this purposefulness in turn leads to an intelligent designer. From these statements, Paley is able to deduce that functionality must point to some sort of intelligent designer. I will now expand on each of these premises and elucidate their respective concepts.
The complex parts and orderly nature of the watch are integral elements of its function. Because the watch has a specific use, we are able to in turn assess its functionality: it either works or it doesn’t. In saying that something does or does not “work,” we are implying that some sort of goal has or has not been met. This goal is the purpose of the watch’s
Paley’s claims that the universe must have an intelligent maker due to the complexity of its design. His primary
The conclusion as stated before but more simplified is, nature has a design, and that the architect of this design is God himself. This is the purpose of the argument as a whole. His entire drive for this argument seemed to convince others that there is a higher being with a higher power. Paley attempted to convince and bring the ath...
In 1986, Richard Dawkins suggested that Paley's "design" argument might have been the best explanation in the 19th century for the existence of God and the intelligent design of the universe in his novel The Blind Watchmaker. Although Paley succeeded in making his argument, Dawkins argued that it had one major defect; the explanation itself. “Paley’s argument is made with passionate sincerity and is informed by the best biological scholarship of his day, but it is wrong, gloriously and utterly wrong.” (Dawkins : 606) Paley gave the traditional religious answer to who our designer is: God.
During the 1800th century, William Paley, an English philosopher of religion and ethics, wrote the essay The Argument from Design. In The Argument from Design, Paley tries to prove the existence of a supreme being through the development of a special kind of argument known as the teleological argument. The teleological argument is argument by analogy, an argument based on the similarities between two different subjects. This essay purposefully attempts to break down Paley’s argument and does so in the following manner: firstly, Paley’s basis for the teleological argument is introduced; secondly, Paley’s argument is derived and analyzed; thirdly, the connection between Paley’s argument and the existence of a supreme being is made; and lastly, the supreme being is compared to the supreme being in Western Philosophy, God.
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.
Paley lays his argument as such: a watch is like the universe in complexity and functionality, a watch needs a designer, therefore, the universe needs a designer as well. Paley’s argument centers around the simile between a watch and the universe . He points out that the watch is complicated with many parts, yet all work together to form a functional machine. Paley shows in his argument that all the pieces of the watch are put together for a definite purpose. No matter how many watches were made before this one, Paley explains that the watch still has a maker. Watches cannot be designed by other watches, some superior being must have created at least the first one. The designer obviously understands how the watch works and how to create it to function properly.
John Polkinghorne’s The Universe as Creation does its best to not convince the reader of Intelligent Design, but rather to dissuade the reader from the notion that although the is intelligently designed, but in this way, it has made science possible.
Proceeding that, Paley introduces his second argument that constructs upon believing in the design of the watch. The stone’s design is not of much interest as that of the watch. Since there exists a design, there must be a designer for that matter. Thirdly, the purpose of some parts of the watch might remain unknown; however, the more complex the parts are, the more likely that one would believe in a designer. Since the stone is still and simple, one would ignore the creation in comparison to that of the watch. In addition to all, the completion of the material provokes the thoughts of the designer’s existence. On the other hand, the last three arguments presented summarise in the purpose of believing in a watchmaker. If one does not believe, he will remain unanswered, filled with void, shocked and scared of the unknown. The meaning of the watch is power of a
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.
...hat the universe is not the same as a human and these two vastly different ideas cannot be compared with each other, Paley argues that the purpose of a watch in terms of its function and complexity, that it had to be created by a designer. Same goes for humans. Hume proves that Paley has a weak conclusion by stating that this does not prove that there is a God, just someone of higher intelligence.
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.
Since the Apple Watch is not a necessity and relatively expensive for even its lower end models, the economic environment could certainly negatively impact Watch sales in present and future markets. One thing Apple has on its side with the release of the Watch, is “the constant thrill that will make the Apple Watch compelling” (Elgan, 2015). To reach another market segment, Apple has succeeded in marketing the Watch as a fashion piece that caters to the “makers that are high achievers who eat, dress, and live well” (Kotler & Keller, 2012, p. 79).
In today’s society there are many arguments surrounding the question “does God exist?”. One of these is the teleological argument. The world around us is very intricate, from snowflakes to plain old rocks, much like the items we ourselves create. Many people nowadays and throughout history (myself included) noticed this trend and think about how our world is structured and detailed in a way that when studied closely, looks as though it must’ve been designed in order to exist at all. Nothing we create that is complex (a computer chip/watch) is there by chance, they had to be designed, it had to be intricately placed together in order to create said object. If this is true of manmade objects, then surely everything that surrounds has to be created by an intelligent being too? These thoughts were brought together by William Paley and form what is known as the teleological argument in philosophy.
He compares God to a watchmaker and the humans as watches. When you see a watch, you know that it did not occur naturally. When you see the watch, you know that there must have been an intelligent maker that had a design and a purpose for the watch. Paley uses the analogy of the watchmaker to argue that even if you have never seen a watchmaker, you know that every watch has a maker, and that maker was incredibly intelligent because the watch is so complex. Just as God is incredibly intelligent and even though you have never seen the creator of man, you know that there has to be a creator since we are so
A watch is a timepiece worn on one’s wrist fastened by a strap or band. They are a common item of purchase for men, women and children. I noticed that there are fewer people wearing watches; most if not all rely on electronic devices for the time, such as mobile phones and tablets. Personally, I feel bare without a watch. My wrist is aware of the absent weight. “For everyone who falls in love with a watch, a watch is the one item that goes everywhere with you, so that even in that lonely motel room on a business trip, or sitting as I am right now stranded in an airport, you can look at your watch and feel a sense of comfort. A watch is your best mechanical friend, wherever you go.” (Stone, 2006)