Does the order, regularity and apparent purpose of the universe show that it was designed by God, or can it be explained without a designer?
Component 01 Arguments from observation: the teleological (design) argument of Aquinas (the Fifth Way) and Paley (the watch analogy), together with Hume's criticisms and the challenge of Darwinian evolution.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 01 guide to the teleological (design) argument. Covers Aquinas's Fifth Way (design qua regularity), Paley's watch analogy (design qua purpose), Hume's criticisms of the analogy and the inference to one perfect designer, and the Darwinian challenge, with the AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed
Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page
Jump to a section
What this dot point is asking
OCR groups the arguments for God under one heading and divides them into arguments from observation (a posteriori, inductive) and arguments from reason (a priori, deductive). The teleological or design argument is the first of the observational arguments: it reasons from the order, regularity and apparent purpose of the universe to a divine designer. You study Aquinas's Fifth Way and Paley's watch analogy, and the two great challenges, Hume's philosophical criticisms and Darwin's theory of evolution. The exam rewards understanding each move and then evaluating whether design survives the challenges.
The answer
Aquinas's Fifth Way (design qua regularity)
Paley's watch analogy (design qua purpose)
The strongest modern restatement is the anthropic or fine-tuning argument: the physical constants of the universe appear precisely calibrated for life, which proponents say design explains better than chance.
Hume's criticisms
The Darwinian challenge
Examples in context
Try this
Q1. "The design argument is destroyed by the theory of evolution." Discuss. [40 marks]
- What the marker wants. An AO2 essay distinguishing the biological design argument (Paley) from the cosmological fine-tuning version, weighing whether evolution removes the need for a designer entirely or only at the biological level, with a justified conclusion. AO1 out of 25, AO2 out of 15.
Q2. Assess Hume's claim that the universe is not sufficiently like a machine for the design argument to work. [40 marks]
- Cue. Hume says the universe resembles an organism more than a watch, so the analogy is weak and cannot reach a single perfect designer. Weigh this against the intuitive force of fine-tuning and judge.
Exam-style practice questions
Practice questions written in the style of OCR exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.
OCR H573/01 2017 (style)20 marksAssess the view that Paley's design argument proves the existence of God. (The full OCR tariff for this essay is 40 marks; the worked answer below is scaled to a 20-mark exemplar.)Show worked answer →
A 40-mark Component 01 essay on the six-level scheme (AO1 out of 25, AO2 out of 15). Setting out the argument earns AO1; the higher levels reward judging whether it amounts to a proof.
Explain (AO1). Paley argues that finding a watch on a heath, with parts arranged for a purpose, would force the conclusion of a watchmaker, even if we had never seen one made. The universe, far more intricate (the eye, the orbits), shows the same design qua purpose, so it must have a designer, namely God.
Evaluate (AO2). Strengths: the analogy is intuitive and the fine-tuning version updates it. Weaknesses: Hume attacks the analogy (the universe is not much like a machine) and the leap to one perfect designer; Darwin explains apparent biological purpose by natural selection, removing the need for design.
Judge. A top answer decides whether the argument proves God, only makes God probable, or fails, and defends the verdict. Concluding that it is at best an inductive argument to a probable designer, not a proof, is a defensible high-level line.
OCR H573/01 2020 (style)20 marksCritically assess Hume's objections to the design argument. (The full OCR tariff for this essay is 40 marks; the worked answer below is scaled to a 20-mark exemplar.)Show worked answer →
A levels-of-response essay testing AO1 understanding of Hume's criticisms and AO2 evaluation of how decisive they are.
Explain. Hume argues the analogy between the universe and a machine is weak; we have no other universes to compare; like effects need not have like causes; the world's flaws fit a limited or apprentice deity; and order could arise by chance over vast time (the Epicurean hypothesis). The argument cannot reach one infinite, perfect, benevolent God.
Evaluate. Hume's attack on the analogy and on the inference to a single perfect designer is powerful, and Darwin later supplies the chance mechanism Hume only hypothesised. Yet defenders reply that fine-tuning re-raises design at the cosmological level, which evolution does not touch.
Judge. A high-level answer weighs whether Hume destroys the argument or only its strongest form, and reaches a justified conclusion.
Related dot points
- Component 01 Arguments from observation: the cosmological argument of Aquinas (the first three Ways, from motion, causation and contingency) and the Kalam argument, together with the criticisms of Hume and Russell.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 01 guide to the cosmological argument. Covers Aquinas's first three Ways (motion, causation, contingency), the Kalam argument from a beginning in time, and the criticisms of Hume (the causal leap) and Russell (the universe as a brute fact and the fallacy of composition), with the AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
- Component 01 Arguments from reason: the ontological argument of Anselm (Proslogion II and III), with Descartes's and Malcolm's developments, together with the criticisms of Gaunilo (the perfect island) and Kant (existence is not a predicate).
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 01 guide to the ontological argument. Covers Anselm's two forms (Proslogion II and III), Descartes's supremely perfect being, Malcolm's necessary existence, and the criticisms of Gaunilo (the perfect island) and Kant (existence is not a predicate), with the AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
- Component 01 Ancient philosophical influences: Plato (the Forms, the Form of the Good, the analogy of the cave) and Aristotle (the four causes and the Prime Mover), and the contrast between Plato's rationalism and Aristotle's empiricism.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 01 guide to ancient philosophical influences. Covers Plato's Theory of Forms, the Form of the Good and the analogy of the cave, Aristotle's four causes and the Prime Mover, and the contrast between Platonic rationalism and Aristotelian empiricism that the exam asks you to evaluate.
- Component 01 The nature and impact of religious experience: mystical experience (William James), conversion and corporate experience, the value of experience, and challenges from physiology, psychology (Freud) and the diversity of experiences.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 01 guide to religious experience. Covers William James's four marks of mystical experience and his pragmatic approach, conversion and corporate experiences, Swinburne's principles of credulity and testimony, and challenges from physiology, Freud and the diversity of experiences, with the AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
- Component 01 The problem of evil: the logical and evidential problems (Mackie, Rowe), the Augustinian theodicy (privation, the Fall, free will) and the Irenaean (Hick's soul-making) theodicy, with their strengths and weaknesses.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 01 guide to the problem of evil. Covers the logical problem (Mackie's inconsistent triad), the evidential problem (Rowe), the Augustinian theodicy (privation of good, the Fall, free will) and the Irenaean soul-making theodicy (Hick), with the strengths, weaknesses and AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
Sources & how we know this
- OCR A Level Religious Studies (H573) specification — OCR (2016)
- William Paley, Natural Theology — Project Gutenberg (1802)