Arguments for the Existence of God: Design (Teleological)

WJEC

A-Level

The Teleological Argument constitutes an 'a posteriori', inductive proof for the existence of God based on observation of the universe. It posits that the complexity, order, and purpose evident in the natural world (qua purpose and qua regularity) necessitate an intelligent designer rather than random chance. The study spans classical formulations by Aquinas (Fifth Way) and Paley (Watchmaker Analogy) to modern reformulations involving the Anthropic Principle and Fine-Tuning (Tennant, Swinburne). Critical analysis requires engagement with Hume's critiques of analogy and Darwinian Natural Selection as an alternative explanation for biological complexity.

Objectives

Exam Tips

Pitfalls

Key Terms

Mark Points

Learning Objectives

What you need to know and understand

St. Thomas Aquinas: Summa Theologica (Fifth Way - Governance of things).
William Paley: Natural Theology (1802) - Watchmaker Analogy.
F.R. Tennant: Philosophical Theology (1930) - Anthropic and Aesthetic Principles.
David Hume: Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion (1779) - Critiques of analogy.
Charles Darwin: On the Origin of Species (1859) - Natural Selection.

Example Examiner Feedback

Real feedback patterns examiners use when marking

"You have described Paley's watch well, but you must explicitly explain *why* this analogy leads to a designer (complexity implies intellect)."
"Your evaluation lists Hume's points; to improve, explain how the 'Fallacy of Composition' specifically dismantles the leap from world-parts to world-whole."
"Include Tennant's Aesthetic principle to broaden the argument beyond mere biological survival."
"Ensure your conclusion directly answers 'how far' the argument succeeds, rather than just summarizing views."

Marking Points

Key points examiners look for in your answers

Award AO1 marks for accurate differentiation between 'design qua purpose' (complexity of the eye/watch) and 'design qua regularity' (rotation of planets).
Credit responses that explicitly link Tennant's Anthropic Principle to the probability of life-sustaining conditions (Goldilocks zone).
Candidates must explain Aquinas' Archer/Arrow analogy as demonstrating the necessity of a guiding intelligence for non-rational beings.
For AO2, credit sustained evaluation of whether evolution renders the 'God of the Gaps' redundant versus the compatibility of theistic evolution.
High-level responses must apply Hume's 'Epicurean Hypothesis' or 'Fallacy of Composition' specifically to the logic of the design argument.

Examiner Tips

Expert advice for maximising your marks

💡In 'Explain' questions (Part A), ensure you cover the chronological development: Aquinas -> Paley -> Tennant.
💡For 'Evaluate' questions (Part B), avoid sitting on the fence; establish a clear line of argument regarding the success of the design hypothesis.
💡Use technical vocabulary: 'teleological', 'a posteriori', 'inductive', 'anthropomorphic', and 'natural selection'.
💡When discussing Darwin, do not just state 'evolution'; explain how random mutation and natural selection provide an alternative mechanism to design.

Common Mistakes

Pitfalls to avoid in your exam answers

Conflating the Teleological argument (Design) with the Cosmological argument (First Cause/Motion).
Presenting Paley's argument as a proof rather than an inductive probability.
Failing to distinguish between Tennant's Anthropic Principle (survival) and Aesthetic Principle (beauty/appreciation).
Listing Hume's criticisms generically without applying them to the specific mechanics of the watchmaker analogy.

Study Guide Available

Comprehensive revision notes & examples

Read Study Guide

Key Terminology

Essential terms to know

Likely Command Words

How questions on this topic are typically asked

Explain

Examine

Evaluate

Discuss

To what extent

Assess

Ready to test yourself?

Practice questions tailored to this topic