Posted: Aug 03, 2017 8:31 am
by Greyman
Wortfish wrote:The point is that Paley was making a religious argument for the existence of God. He was not trying to explain how watches are designed. The ID movement claims to have an explanation for biological complexity when all they have is a religious interpretation.
Negative. Paley had an explanation for the origin of complex mechanisms that need to be assembled whole from manufactured components, like watches. Watchmakers. He was insisting that the same explanation could/should be used for the origin of living organisms that grow and reproduce themselves, like chickens.

That his aim was to infer the necessity for god does not place the argument in some non-overlapping magisteria bubble where we stop applying critical thought.