Revisiting the design argument

Abstract

Abstract The chapter evaluates the impacts of the discovery of evolution by natural selection and the case for maladaptation on Paley’s design argument for the benevolent character of God, arguing that Paley’s design argument still remains tenable. Despite the narratives of many evolutionary biologists including Darwin, the claim that the discovery of evolution by natural selection demolished Paley’s design argument is shown to misunderstand his question. Paley’s natural theology is evaluated, discerning how a scientific solution to the problem of design is pre-emptively dismissed as an unrelated theory of secondary causation. The demolition claims of Darwin and other evolutionary biologists are shown to reduce to the problem of evil, and Paley’s response is presented through the lens of his empirical philosophy and utilitarian ethics. The theological question of design is restated in secular terms. The case for maladaptation poses a greater challenge to Paley’s natural theology. Again, Paley has a pre-emptive response resting on the balance of evidence; even with maladaptation providing some evidence for the malevolence of God, the case of overwhelming benevolence is appraised. Whilst Paley’s design argument remains robust, some aspects of his wider outlook that have become increasingly problematic are discussed, but these are shown to be peripheral to his design argument. Contrary to his wider theology, it is argued that Paley’s natural theology is a foundational philosophy that remains tenable because it is deistic.