Zygon 45 (3):665-684 (2010)

Authors
Johan De Smedt
University of Ghent
Helen De Cruz
Saint Louis University
Abstract
The argument from design stands as one of the most intuitively compelling arguments for the existence of a divine Creator. Yet, for many scientists and philosophers, Hume's critique and Darwin's theory of natural selection have definitely undermined the idea that we can draw any analogy from design in artifacts to design in nature. Here, we examine empirical studies from developmental and experimental psychology to investigate the cognitive basis of the design argument. From this it becomes clear that humans spontaneously discern purpose in nature. When constructed theologically and philosophically correctly, the design argument is not presented as conclusive evidence for God's existence but rather as an abductive, probabilistic argument. We examine the cognitive basis of probabilistic judgments in relationship to natural theology. Placing emphasis on how people assess improbable events, we clarify the intuitive appeal of Paley's watch analogy. We conclude that the reason why some scientists find the design argument compelling and others do not lies not in any intrinsic differences in assessing design in nature but rather in the prior probability they place on complexity being produced by chance events or by a Creator. This difference provides atheists and theists with a rational basis for disagreement
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9744.2010.01120.x
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 71,410
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.Thomas Samuel Kuhn - 1962 - Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Laws and Symmetry.Bas C. Van Fraassen - 1989 - Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Critique of Judgment.Immanuel Kant - 1790 - Barnes & Noble.
Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion.David Hume - 1779/1998 - In Elizabeth Schmidt Radcliffe, Richard McCarty, Fritz Allhoff & Anand Vaidya (eds.), Philosophical Review. Blackwell. pp. 338-339.

View all 38 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Computer Modeling in Philosophy of Religion.F. LeRon Shults - 2019 - Open Philosophy 2 (1):108-125.

View all 10 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Atheism and Evolution.Daniel C. Dennett - 2007 - In Michael Martin (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Atheism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 135--148.
Design and its Discontents.Bruce H. Weber - 2011 - Synthese 178 (2):271 - 289.
Teleology.Andre Ariew - 2007 - In David L. Hull & Michael Ruse (eds.), The Cambridge Companion to the Philosophy of Biology. Cambridge University Press.
Paley’s Inductive Inference to Design.Jonah N. Schupbach - 2005 - Philosophia Christi 7 (2):491-502.
Remarques Sur la Théologie Naturelle Anglo-Saxonne Aujourd’Hui.Philippe Gagnon - 2005 - Connaître. Cahiers de l'Association Foi Et Culture Scientifique 22:83-108.
Paley’s Argument for Design.Graham Oppy - 2002 - Philo 5 (2):161-173.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2010-08-11

Total views
187 ( #63,731 of 2,519,863 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
4 ( #166,836 of 2,519,863 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes