WE A CREATION OF RANDOM PROCESS
By Alhassan Darboe
The design argument has achieved much popularity concerning God’s existence. The design argument states that the order and purpose apparent in the works of nature demonstrate their design by an intelligent being. The design argument has come to be the major where much of the debate between religion and science is being conducted. Traditionally, a renowned argument, the design proof is still accepted today by many scientists, such as biologist Edmund W. Sinnot and physicist and cosmologist Paul Davies, as well as many theologians like Robert ED Clark, Richard Swinburne, Alvin Plantinga and Michael A Correy. In 1802, Michael Correy made a seminal argument which has now become the classic exposition of the design argument. Drawing comparison of natural organisms to the mechanism of a watch, Paley postulated that just as the design of a watch proffers implication of an intelligent watchmaker, so the design found in natural organisms implies the existence of an intelligent “divine agency”.
Paley advances that every indication of contrivance, every manifestation of design, which existed in the watch, exists in the works of nature surpass the contrivances of art, in the complexity, subtlety and curiosity of the mechanism . This, he said, is sufficient to support the necessity of an intelligent creator.
Paley cited a litany of examples from the sciences (especially biology) to demonstrate his argument.
He added that the pattern of migration of birds, the instincts of animals, the adaptability of species to various environments, and the ability of humans to base forecast on probable cause suggested a plan and a planner.
However, for Patley the most impressive example of a natural creation that was obviously made by an intelligent designer was the eye. He writes that as far as the design of the instrument goes there is precisely the same proof that the eye was made for vision as there is that the telescope was made for assisting it.He added that the eye was exactly shaped so that its lenses focus light on its sensitive interior in accordance with the laws of optics, the skull was hollowed out into a socket exactly sized to enclose and protect the eye. To further demonstrate the genius of creation and necessity of an intelligent designer, he indicated that the exterior skin was shaped into an eyelid that carefully protected the eye, wiped it and closed it in sleep; a gland was provided to produce tears that washed the eyes.
However, British philosopher David Hume did point out a fundamental problem with any argument from design. He said that the experience of watching somebody make watch was something we could see and appreciate that it was put there by an intelligent agent. But he objected that the order we see in an animal, an eye or universe might have been produced by random process.
Hume’s objection was centered on a key assumption in the argument of design. The design argument assumes that an intelligent agent must produce the complex order found in any object. His assumption remains unproved yet raise the question that the order that can be gleaned from other things is produced by a mechanism that is not intelligent. Hume argued that the order in the universe might have been produced by a random process of development.
Despite the challenges posed by Darwin’s theory of evolution, many believers continue to embrace the argument from design and feel that a designer’s hand is revealed in the intricate complexities of nature. For the believer who accepts the theistic understanding of evolution, the complex order of organisms was put there through natural selection; therefore, they are evidence of God’s intelligence design.
Paley’s defenders further came up with the idea of “fine-tuning” which related to inductive arguments of intelligent design .Atheism denies the existence of all varieties of theism. Ernest Nagel says theism denies the existence of a self-consistent, omnipotent, omniscient, righteous and benevolent being who is distinct from and independent of what has been created. Hume advances the argument that if the creator of the universe is a very good, wise and powerful being then the world should be free of vice and misery. Thomas Huxley postulated that agnosticism expressed unalloyed faith in the validity of the principle that it is wrong for a man to say that he is certain of the objective truth of any proposition unless he can produce evidence which logically satisfies that certainty.
Sigmund Freud (1856-1939), however, believes it is unclear whether or not God exists but in his work titled the Future of an illusion he said that belief in God is an illusion that has provenances in infantile needs.