In-depth Analysis: Paley's Teleological Argument and Critique

This essay provides a detailed analysis of William Paley's teleological argument, also known as the Design argument, which posits the existence of God based on the perceived design and order in the universe. Paley compares the universe to a watch, arguing that its intricate mechanisms imply an intelligent creator, much like a watchmaker. The essay also explores criticisms of Paley's argument, particularly those put forth by Hume, who compares the universe to an animal with God as its soul. The counter-arguments suggest that the universe may have multiple creators or that its intricate functionality surpasses that of human-made artifacts. The essay concludes by highlighting the debate between Paley's view of a perfectly functional universe created by an intelligent being and the opposing view of God as the soul of the universe.

Running head: PALEY’S TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT
PALEY’S TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1PALEY’S TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT
In this paper, I will discuss the teleological argument as put forth by Paley. In the first
section I will discuss the definition of God and the teleological argument followed by the
discussion of the criticism on the teleological argument as put forth by the various
contemporaries as well as the successors of Paley. The following report attempts a description of
the teleological argument as proposed William Paley and proceeds further to relate the
arguments made by Hume in criticism of the arguments put forth by Paley.
Definition of teleological argument
The teleological argument, often known as the Design argument, deals with the areas that
pertain to the proof of the existence of the Supreme Being or any other Divine Form. The
teleological argument states that there might exist within the universe a very powerful and vastly
intelligent designer who might have been responsible for the creation of this universe. The
argument as put forth by Paley suggests that the teleological argument might be termed to be an
a posteriori argument that argues for the existence of the Supreme Being. The eminent
philosopher tends to explain the same through the famous “watch” argument. The philosopher
aims to compare the universe to a watch. The philosopher states that the intricate mechanisms of
the watch help in the stating that the concerned instrument has been made by an efficient and
intelligent mind who is capable of the understanding the nuances of the instrument and thereby
helping in the matters that relate to the comprehension of the mechanism of the same (Paley,
2014). The philosopher compares the making of the universe to the making of the watch and
goes on further to suggest that the creator of the universe might also be referred to as an artifact
that depicts the characteristics that are demonstrated by the human artifacts that are designed by
the efficient and intelligent human beings (Kojonen, 2016). The philosopher argues that the
universe demonstrates similar characteristics thereby leading to the conclusion that the universe

2PALEY’S TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT
might also be designed by some intelligent being who is superior and seems to have sound
knowledge of the various mechanisms that form the base of the activities of the universe
(Noguera‐Solano, 2013). The premises explained by the celebrated philosopher draws on the
nature of the purposeful nature of the universe that bear a similarity to the various artifacts that
are designed by the humans. The universe also depicts the purposefulness of the arrangement
thereby assisting the process of deciphering the fact that the universe too has a purpose of
existence. The vast and the more complex design of the universe leads to the inference that states
the universe is the creation of a being that is capable of the possession and the implementation of
the various designs and calculations that are needed for the precise and accurate functioning of
the universe.
Definition of God
According to the celebrated philosopher, the existence of the Supreme Being might be
confirmed with the existence and the proper functionality of the universe as a whole. The
philosopher tends to put forth the comparison that the Supreme Being might be compared to a
watchmaker who is capable of designing a watch in the most precise manner. The philosopher
states that the concerned universe might be compared to a watch that has a complex as well as
intricate functionality (Page, 2015). The Supreme Being or the Almighty is thus referred to by
the concerned philosopher as the being an intelligent being that is capable of having a sound
knowledge of the matters that pertain to the working of the universe.
Criticism of Paley
However, the views of the eminent philosopher were criticized and opposed by the
contemporaries as well as successors of the celebrated philosopher. The eminent philosopher,

3PALEY’S TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT
Hume, further compares the universe to an animal and further suggests that the Supreme Being
might be compared to the soul of the concerned animal (De Cruz, 2014). This might help in the
understanding of the matters that pertain to the universe and the Almighty at large. The Supreme
Being might also be compared to the soul of an animal, the universe. The other criticism of the
universe creation state that the creator of the universe might not be a single person but a number
of people since there are possibilities that the universe might be a composition of the various
parts of the same (Holder, 2017). The counter-argument of the given argument states that the
universe is functional on a very intricate manner while he watches might malfunction at any
given point of time.
Thus, it can be safely concluded that the teleological argument as put forth by the
celebrated philosopher, William Paley states that the universe-maker is an entity that bears a
huge intelligence thereby creating a universe that has been perfectly functional. The philosopher
suggests that the universe might be compared to a vegetable or an animal who is functionless
without a soul. The philosophers who had posed an objection to the theory put forth by Paley
states that the Supreme Being might be known to be the soul of the Universe.

4PALEY’S TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT
References
De Cruz, H. (2014). The enduring appeal of natural theological arguments. Philosophy
Compass, 9(2), 145-153.
Holder, R. D. (2017). God, the multiverse, and everything: Modern cosmology and the argument
from design. Routledge.
Kojonen, E. V. (2016). Salvaging the Biological Design Argument in Light of
Darwinism?. Theology and Science, 14(3), 361-381.
Noguera‐Solano, R. (2013). The metaphor of the architect in Darwin: Chance and free
will. Zygon®, 48(4), 859-874.
Page, B. (2015). The dispositionalist deity: How God creates laws and why theists should
care. Zygon®, 50(1), 113-137.
Paley, W. (2014). The Watch and the Watchmaker. Philosophy of Religion: An Anthology, 198.