The Watchmaker Argument - Debunked (Teleological Argument - Refuted)

As most famously presented by William Paley in his theological work titled “Natural Theology”, the Watchmaker Analogy (teleological argument) is a recurring argument for a designer, which, by way of analogy, asserts that complexity requires a designer.

The way Paley put it is essentially as follows: if you were walking across a field and saw a watch lying upon the ground, you wouldn’t assume that it had come together by chance because it’s too ordered and complicated. Rather, you would assume that it had a conscious and intelligent designer. By way of analogy, Paley then went on to argue that because life and indeed the universe is ordered and complicated, it too must’ve had a conscious and intelligent designer.

Throughout the video I pint-point several flaws and fallacies that those who use the Watchmaker tend to commit, but for a very brief summery (extremely brief), they are as follows:

1. False Analogy:

An analogy is a comparison between things that have similar features for the purpose of explaining a principle or an idea, and in this case, Paley insists that a comparison can be made between the complexity of a watch and the complexity of the universe, which both imply that they had a designer.

2. False Cause Fallacy:

Essentially, like all False Cause Fallacies, the Watchmaker Argument mistakenly confuses correlation with causation. It recognizes a relationship between complexity and designers, and then concludes that one necessarily implies the other.

3. Ignores Evolution by Natural Selection:

It completely ignores evolution by natural selection. Without getting into it too deeply, natural selection has been completely and utterly proven to be an unconscious process that has given rise to countless complex and purposed organisms. The watchmaker argument ignores this in the attempt to substantiate it’s black and white fallacy (deliberate designer or randomness).

4. Special Pleading:

Its core premise asserts that purpose and complexity requires a designer, and so if we draw the Watchmaker Argument out to its logical conclusion – that there is a god and that it created the universe and everything in it, then by applying the argument’s logic to itself we must conclude that this god too had a designer, and so on and so forth for infinity…

5. Contradiction:

The Watchmaker Argument is self-contradicting. The argument first assumes that a watch is different from nature, which it indirectly claims is uncomplicated and random. However, it then states that since the universe is so complicated and ordered it too must have a creator. Thus, it gives the universe two incompatible and contradicting qualities.

6. Shoemaker:

The Watchmaker Argument doesn’t imply a designer – it implies that there are many designers. After finding that watch upon the ground, imagine if you then saw beside it a shoe. Would you assume that a watchmaker made that shoe? Of course not – you would assume that a shoemaker made it.

7. Ex Nihilo

The Watchmaker Argument acts as if a watchmaker creates a watch from nothing, when this simply isn’t true. A watch, like all human creations, is a rearrangement of energy and mater that already existed.

8. Doesn’t Support Theism:

The Watchmaker Argument doesn’t support theism. Even if it were accepted as a sound argument, it would only prove that a universe had a universe designer – and that’s it. It wouldn’t prove a particular religion to be true.

9. Incompetent Design:

An all-powerful and all-loving god would not create organisms with the type of suboptimal design that can be seen in nature. Meaning that either that god isn’t omnipotent or that it isn’t omnibenevolent – or both!

--

--

As always, thanks you kindly for the view, and I hope that this video will help you defeat those who would use the Watchmaker Argument against you.

[jonhillman]

God is complex.
Therefore, God is a watch.

[joslynstuff]

Worth noting the watchmaker puts his mark on his work he doesn't make it anonymously and then hide all evidence of his very existence .

[YeetZmeN]

PewDiePie has a YT Channel
PewDiePie has the most subscribers.
Rationality Rules Has a YT Channel.
Therefore, Rationality Rules has the most subscribers

[thejames]

God Is Complex
Therefore God Had a Designer.

[haffelbaffel]

The watch is complex
The watch was invented by Peter Henlein
The universe is complex
Therefore it was invented by Peter Henlein

ALL PRAISE PETER HENLEIN

[SubCivilization]

The watch was not invented in the 15th Century. It was invented in 1995. I read it in a holy book.

[marianpalko]

You know what isn't complex? An A4 sheet of paper. Yet, if you found an A4 sheet of paper somewhere, you would automatically assume that it must have had a designer. And do you know why? Because every single A4 sheet of paper that the humanity has ever come across has had a designer, and it is an object that never does occur naturally. By this we can demonstrate that it isn't the complexity of an object which determines whether or not we assume that it was designed. Rather we use our already available pool of knowledge containing the data about the origin of similar/identical objects and the feasibility of a natural occurrence of those objects. Now, how many other universes do we have to compare the ours to? Exactly ZERO.

[Templetonq]

Design flaws in nature are our fault because our ancestors ate some magic fruit before we were born. Duh!

[thrownswordpommel]

Watches are complex
Switzerland is the best at watch-making
The universe is complex
Therefore, bow down to Switzerland !

[JordanMichael]

"Let's imagine you're walking in the woods and come across a watch. The watch is beautiful and set to precisely the correct time.

You'd assume it had a designer, unlike the rock next to it; which is completely useless"

[johnrildo]

Do you ever walk out in the woods and say, " there's no way that these trees planted themselves and grew over time to be what they are now. There must have been a creator who shaped each leaf and branch"? It would be ridiculous.

We know that organisms currently grow and evolve on their own, so why assume that a creator was necessary in the past?

[mysteryh]

A watch tells time.
My smartphone tells time.
Therefore, my watch can make calls.

[constantcomment]

Why wouldn't Paley upon finding a watch in the grass and examining its complexity remark, "Look what God has designed." Because we have evidence that watchmakers exist.

[gilesw]

You could simply reject the premise that complexity is a feature of design.

[mattsalvatore]

God is complex.
The watch is complex.
Therefore, The watchmaker made god

[wolframstahl]

I just rewatched this and by the end (9:30) thought "let's see how many subscribers he has by now".

It's 300K. Not 299K or 301K, it's 300K. I love coincidences.

[rcnfo]

Six years later and you have MORE than the 300, 000 subscribers Armored Skeptic had at the time of this video. Well played.

[shawngrinter]

One of the best and most comprehensive exposures to date.

[biostemm]

Depending upon the criteria used, one could argue that a watch is actually far simpler than the natural world around it - even a simple rock can have millions of facets and variances in its shape and makeup, far more than the watch, which lacks any unnecessary components, or adaptation of previous iterations of watches, which are inferior in how they accomplish any given task.

[Ryder-wttk]

The false analogy is also an example of a logical fallacy called affirming the consequent. This argument here is valid, " men are mortal, Socrates is man, therefore Socrates is mortal" however this next argument is an example of affirming the consequent, " Socrates is mortal, men are mortal, therefore all men are Socrates."