Human beings cannot perceive nature as random, unplanned, or unexplained, accidents because such phenomena should have an explanation in their minds. Consequently, since the time of Ancient Greece, many people have interpreted the natural world’s beauty and elegance as the deliberative and directive actions of somebody’s creation. Apart from cosmological arguments, teleological ones assure that all life on earth is under the guidance of God’s (or the designer’s) knowledge, wisdom, and intent (Ratzsch & Koperski, 2020). Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to evaluate teleological reasoning and its strengths and weaknesses.
Issues with design interventions regularly emerge when the conscious designer is considered as something supernatural. In many cases, there are some good and compelling empirical arguments, describing this employed logic. Firstly, inductive thinking provides the information that an individual may observe, and it is hard not to notice such order in the universe like seasonal changes. For instance, if a machine is “a product of deliberate design by intelligent,” and it is similar to how nature was created (Ratzsch & Koperski, 2020, para. 11). Consequently, nature was probably constructed by somebody’s mind the same way. Secondly, evolutionary theory and other scientific hypotheses correspond to empirical points and could represent a plan for the functioning of the universe. Therefore, one should claim that the given pros are persuasive and has its followers.
On the other hand, some dubious facts contradict historical events and weaken the empirical arguments. The inductive method of examining nature leads only to an anticipated outcome and people’s assumptions based on observation may turn out to be false. Moreover, a logical chain of sequences, touching upon a machine design by human abilities, does not have enough proof to conclude that the universe itself has a designer. Furthermore, there could be more godlike supernatural beings who could have designed the world. Nevertheless, even there are numerous cons, teleological understanding is a significant argument, which is not going to vanish unobtrusively.
In conclusion, it is essential to maintain that human beings have tried to find arguments in favor of or against God’s existence, but there are different theories coexisting in the modern world. Although the teleological argument has been discussed in this paper alongside with its advantages and drawbacks, the leading dispute’s causes are some features which are omitted and do not possess supporting evidence. Nonetheless, many people either religious or scientific believe in teleological argument due to its simple explanation.
Reference
Ratzsch, D., & Koperski, J. (2020). The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy: teleological arguments for God’s existence. (E. N Zalta., Ed.). Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University.