My Design Teleological Argument

According to Christian apologist William Paley (1743-1805), whatever exhibits apparent function (like a watch) is designed by an intelligent mind. Paley, then, stated that human beings are examples of design. All the vital organs working together for a purpose, i.e., so that the organism can survive. However, Paley died some years before Darwin/Wallace discovered the process of evolution, which can explain why humans exhibit function without any appeal to an intelligence behind it.

Nevertheless, that doesn't mean Paley's argument is completely refuted. After all, just because life isn't a good example of design, doesn't mean other objects can't be. As an example take the atom; it seems to have a function. Consider the electrons correctly spread out around it (following Schrodinger's equation). When the correct number of electrons (and protons) is there, the atom will bind to another specific atom and etc, forming interesting structures.

The atom seems to have a function, and unfortunately there is no Darwinian evolution in the case of the atom.

The argument can be stated roughly in the following way:

P1. Whatever has many parts that seem to work to an end (a final cause) is created by an intelligent mind (e.g., humans).

P2. The atom has many parts that seem to work to an end.

C. Therefore, the atom was created by an intelligent mind.

The evidence in support of premise one is purely empirical. We observe functions in human-made artifacts, and so we can use this observation to infer design in other objects.

Now, let me address potential objections.

First, this is not an argument from ignorance. That is, I'm not saying "We don't have an explanation of atoms. Therefore, it must be God." No, that would be silly. Instead of appealing to what we don't know, I'm appealing to what we do know, and that's the fact that whatever exhibits function and works to an end has an intelligent cause.

Second, one might argue that I'm not omniscient, so I can't really know that everything that has a function is designed. In response, I would say that's a misunderstanding. I'm not claiming absolute certainty. This is a probabilistic argument. For example, we say "Every time someone jumped from a very tall building (without any special device), they died. Therefore, it is likely that if I jump right now, I'll have a similar fate." Of course, it is logically possible that I could peacefully and slowly land without a scratch. That's at least logically possible. But it is massively unlikely given what we know about the world.

Third, I'm not saying this proves any specific god exists. Indeed, if you feel more comfortable, we can simply call it, "Intelligence" or "creator." No need to call it a "Christian" or "Muslim" deity.