The teleological argument
Teleological arguments are often divided into types by philosophers; 1. Arguments based on purpose 2. Arguments based on regularity
Thomas Aquinas 1. When you look at the natural world, you can see that everything in it follows natural laws, even if the things are not conscious, thinking being. 2. If things follow natural laws they tend to do well and have some goal or purpose. 3. However, if a thing cannot think for itself it does not have any goal or purpose unless it is directed by something that thinks: take an arrow as an example. It can only be directed to its goal and used for its purpose by someone, such as an archer. 4. Conclusion: everything in the natural world that does not think for itself heads towards its goal or purpose because it is directed by something which does think. That something we call ‘God’.
William Paley
Part 1. 1. Paley suggests that if you went for a walk and found a rock, you could conclude that it had been there forever and not think any more about it. Whereas if you found a watch (an old fashioned watch with cogs and springs) you could examine it and find that it had moving parts which demonstrate that: (a) The watch was for a purpose: telling the time (b) The parts work together or are fit for a purpose (c) The parts were ordered and put together in a certain way to make the watch function (d) If the parts are arranged in a different way the watch does not work, i.e. it does not fulfil its purpose 2. Conclusion: the watch had a maker who ‘must have existed, at some time, and at some place or other, an artificer or artificers who formed it for the purpose which we find it actually to answer; who comprehended its construction and designed its use’ (Paley, Natural Theology)
Part 2. 1. Suppose the watch had another imaginary function: that of producing other watches.