Is the activity of an intelligent designer the best explanation Essay Example

to accomplish its purpose, implying the presence of a wise creator who steers the universe towards sustaining human life. Consequently, I am persuaded that intelligent action is the most credible justification, given that each aspect of creation possesses a distinct purpose and complex design. It would be illogical to presume that everything materialized by chance.

The Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion (1779) by Hume presents a contrasting viewpoint. Hume uses the characters Philo and Cleanthes to argue that an analogy can only be effective if the two comparable things bear some resemblance. Hume further posits that it is impossible to compare something earthly, like a builder designing a house, with the vastness of the universe as there is no tangible basis for comparison.

He argued that it is equally plausible to claim that the universe arose by chance as it is to assert that it was designed. He made reference to earlier notions predating Darwin that proposed natural selection as the explanation for animal survival, attributing it to their adaptability rather than intentional design. A different perspective presented in Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion posits that the universe was spun from the abdomen of a spider, an unintelligent entity capable of creating a complex web imbued with both design and purpose.

Hume challenges the notion of an intelligent designer, but I disagree with his argument because he admits to the presence of design without offering an explanation. Moreover, Hume's explanation of the universe's mere existence by chance is unclear and does not refute the idea that an intelligent designer is the most plausible explanation for our entire universe, as will be demonstrated later.

Furthermore, the concept of Design qua Regularity,

which examines the design in the universe and its alignment with observable uniformity, often leads to the inference that there is an intelligent designer. Paley's argument from regularity originates from his examination of Newton's laws, particularly gravity and planetary rotation, in which he asserts that if these forces had followed any other consistent pattern, it would have caused immense chaos and devastation. (Paley, W. 2008). This argument can be seen as relating to the Fine Tuning argument.

According to this statement, all the fundamental constants in the universe exist in perfect balance to facilitate the emergence of sentient beings. Even a slight alteration in these constants would have prevented our evolution. This argument is closely related to the Anthropic Principle, which suggests that the universe has been purposely structured to enable the existence of intelligent life.

According to F.R. Tennant's Philosophical Theology (1930), our universe could potentially be chaotic and lacking natural laws that allow for our existence. However, the fact that our universe exhibits such beauty and order suggests the presence of a designer. So, in considering the regularity of our universe, I believe that an intelligent designer is the most plausible explanation. The components of our universe are perfectly suited for sustaining human life, making it irrational to attribute this to chance, as these laws could easily change again by chance.

Kant's work, Critique of Pure Reason (2003), implies that the universe may be inherently chaotic and it is our interpretation that perceives it as structured. This signifies that even if we comprehend a world with order, it doesn't necessarily infer the presence of an intelligent creator. Rather, what we view as order could merely be

the outcome of nature's laws shaping the disorder.

One may counter-argue that the universe seeming perfect for us is not unexpected; instead, we have evolved and adapted to fit within its limitations. Furthermore, while it's true we know only one method in which universal constants permit intelligent life forms to thrive, alternative evolutionary pathways might exist. Despite these arguments, I maintain my belief that they don't sufficiently refute the existence of an intelligent creator. They lack a plausible alternate theory explaining how our universe achieved the precise calibration necessary to support conscious life.

In conclusion, the points previously mentioned underscore that the most fitting explanation is an intelligent designer. This is not solely due to its more rational argumentation, but also because alternative arguments or ideas are lacking in convincing responses. Therefore, for our entire universe, an intelligent designer stands as the most suitable explanation.