In Natural Theology, a book that Charles Darwin studied as a young man, the theologian William Paley pointed out that if you found a watch on a heath you’d naturally assume it had a designer.
Paley argued, that in a similar way, the human eye, a brilliant piece of biological machinery, must have had a designer too. But but does this prove the existence of a Divine Watchmaker?
Narrated by Gillian Anderson. Scripted by Nigel Warburton.
From the BBC Radio 4 series about life’s big questions – A History of Ideas. http://www.bbc.co.uk/historyofideas
This project is from the BBC in partnership with The Open University, the animations were created by Cognitive.
BBC Radio 4
Source
I think this would have been more interesting if that American had narrated this piece with a German or Italian accent instead of an English accent. /s
I keep forgetting that Gillian Anderson grew up in England.
I love the voice.
We'd thought God is an Overwhelming-invisible-universal-size-entity but what this video make us think is the oppose, cause a universe (or god) can be contained in a single particule or even more deeper (a cell, a nucleous, a dna… and go on).
Great piece. But I'm still stuck on the teleological argument. Even if we evolve by natural selection, why do we do this? What's the point of surviving? What is the ultimate purpose? Why do we keep going on? I'm neutral on this matter, btw.
Yet then the question extends to, "who designed natural selection?" To which the answer might lie just outside our realm of understanding.
Natural selection is not proven, and it does not make sense. Evolution maybe true, but natural selection it is not.
evolution cannot create life. evolution cannot design life. The DNA that determines a life form is unique to every living creature. You cannot attribute to evolution things that only God can do. And what about the cosmos? the sun, moon, and stars? evolution cannot apply to their design. They are clearly made by a Designer who created them to behave a certain way. The sun, moon, and planets do not behave the way they do by accident. That is absurd. What these atheist scientists have done is make evolution their god. Anything that is obviously designed, whether something created by man, or the cosmos, or a life form requires a designer. Atheists cannot account for this, so they use faulty arguments and a bunch of confusing words to claim to disprove it. But the incontrovertible fact remains. Anything designed requires a designer and a maker.
Wait, so is Gillian Anderson's native accent, an english one? or American?
Yes son
wargwan
As a teenager, I had a collage of Gillian Anderson pictures on my computer desktop. Now I hope a moving car makes a real life collage out of her. "I don't feel sorry for men" …Die.
In natural Theology, a book that Charles Darwin studied as a young man the Theologian William Palley pointed out the if you found a watch on a heath you'd naturally assume it has a designer.
I've seen people make watches. I've never seen someone make a planet.
The intelligence of evolutions designer was emergent through the conditions of the environment and the interplay of species within it.
Who decides the Cosmos had a Creator? And who Created the Creator?
The Teleological Argument or the Divine Watchmaker Argument are assumptions.
The Assumption says: Everything MUST HAVE a cause.
Why?
Because there HAS TO BE a cause and I cannot on go on living in a universe that has no cause.
And that cause is a god.
So let's assemble a god.
God is an invisible male, with the following attributes:
Eternity
Goodness
Graciousness
Holiness
Immanence
Immutability
Impassibility
Impeccability
Incomprehensibility
Incorporeality
Infinity
Jealousy
Love
Mission
Mystery
Omnipotence
Omnipresence
Omniscience
Oneness
Providence
Righteousness
Simplicity
Sovereignty
Transcendence
Trinity
Veracity
Wrath
Conclusion: For those that want and need to believe in a god, this is for you.
For those that prefer to do their own thinking, a simple "I don't know" will also work.
Because … Beaks! That's why the watch you found had no designer. Right…
This is a horrible video. The natural selection process does not disprove Paley's argument at all. In Paley's argument, the natural selection process would be considered as a by-product of the creation of the universe. Whoever published this article clearly has never read any of Willam Paley's arguments, the discovery of natural selection would not have answered his question of the universe having a creator.
Most of the video was spent trying to show why this argument is completely invalid… Yet many still see this as a credible argument and there are lingering counter-questions not addressed in this video. Biased vid.