'The world appears designed, so God exists'. The claim 'the world appears designed, so God exists' is based on the design argument which is also known as the teleological argument.
Teleological arguments are arguments from the order in the universe to the existence of God. They are also known as arguments from design which state that the universe is being ordered to an end or purpose. Furthermore, it also leads to an intelligent being creating the universe as it is so complex with purpose rather than it being this way by chance. These arguments proceed by attempting to identify various empirical features of the world that constitute evidence of intelligent design and inferring God’s existence as the best explanation for these features. St Aquinas argued that many objects in the world without innate intelligence perform in a way that produces the best results because they are designed this way, indicating that there is a designer behind everything in the world, and that designer is God. He uses the analogy of an arrow to prove the existence of God. An arrow reaches its target because an archer directs it there. Aquinas argued that the reason objects in our world perform their job efficiently is because they were designed to do so. However, a simple arrow analogy cannot be compared to the lifecycle of a butterfly or the theory of evolution.

Paley similarly argues about the existence of a designer, he said you can clearly distinguish rocks from objects that are designed. He argued that the natural world was full of apparent examples of design. His most famous argument is the Analogy of the watch; focusing on the manner in which things like a watch fit together in a particular way for a purpose. All parts of the watch are clearly designed 'and put together for a purpose, e.g. they are formed and adjusted as to produce motion, and that motion so regulated as to point out the hour of the day'. So, if any of the parts had been shaped differently or put together in a different order the watch wouldn't work. In addition, Paley also stated that the complexity of the human eye and the way in which the parts fit together for the purpose of seeing must be designed, as it cannot form without a creator. Hume counter argues Aquinas and Paley, stating that the design argument is deeply flawed, he says that you cannot compare God to anything on Earth. He considered organic objects that can grow and develop on their own. Hume argued that because we only know this world, we are not in a position to judge whether it 'contains any great faults or deserves any praise if compared to other possible - or even real - systems.' We cannot step out of the universe and see how it works. However, Hume's counterargument is not plausible in that complex and intelligent processes and convention are by chance and not design. How can my ability to sense and see things simply be a biological disorder simply formed into order?