Design requires a designer
From EvoWiki
Contents |
Claim
Design requires a designer; contrivance requires a contriver.
Source
- Paley, William, 1802. Natural Theology, p. 11.
Responses
- If by "design" one means "a complex, well-organized system" then this is simply begging the question. The person making this argument wishes to show that complex systems were designed, and attempts to do so by assuming that all complex systems must have been designed.
- If, on the other hand, "design" means, by definition, "something which is designed," this is a simple tautology which is trivially true, and the question-begging is transferred to the claim that life exhibits traits of design. Equivocating these two possible meanings of "design" allows the arguer to hide the question begging by shifting it from one point to another when making this argument.
- Crystals of all kinds, from quartz to crocite to ice, have been forming without the help or need of a designer for billions of years.
- Point out that what is being done is factually mirroring the human mind on existence. Because humans can understand logic (and thus design) this does not mean everything that holds logic/design is automatically created. It simply means we, as humans, are capable of designing. Not that everything that seems to hold design is also designed.
- add more responses
Fallacies contained in this claim
- Argument from Ignorance (Paley just couldn't imagine how)
- Equivocation (Just what is meant by "design"?)
- Begging the Question ("Complexity requires a designer." or "Life is 'design'.")
- Tautology (All design has a designer because "design" is so defined.)
External Links
- Mark Isaak's page for this claim [1]
