Philo 5 (2):161-173 (2002)

Graham Oppy
Monash University
The main aim of this paper is to examine an almost universal assumption concerning the structure of Paley’s argument for design. 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. Moreover, I argue that, when Paley’s argument is properly understood, it can readily be seen that it is no good. Finally---although I do not stress this very much---I note that the points that I make about Paley’s argument can carryover to modern design arguments that are based upon the argument that Paley actually gives
Keywords Philosophy and Religion
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s) 1098-3570
DOI 10.5840/philo20025210
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
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

Atheism.Michael Martin - 1982 - Teaching Philosophy 5 (2):152-155.
Does God Exist?: A Dialogue.Todd C. Moody - 1996 - Hackett Publishing.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles


Added to PP index

Total views
2,499 ( #1,564 of 2,498,759 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
340 ( #1,336 of 2,498,759 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes