The Teleological Argument is also known as the “argument from design.” Quite simply, it states that a designer must exist since the universe and living things exhibit marks of design in their order, consistency, unity, and pattern. (CARM.org)
Various concepts of teleology [have been] developed by ancient and classical philosophers, such as Plato, who proposed a divine Artificer; others, notably Aristotle, rejected that conclusion in favor of a more naturalistic teleology. (Wikipedia)
William Paley, archdeacon of Carlisle [in the 1700’s], used the analogy of a watch and a watchmaker to show the correlation between an intricately designed object and the necessity of an intelligence to bring about that design. He argued that human artifacts are products of intelligence; the universe resembles human artifacts; therefore, the universe is a product of intelligent design. Since the universe is huge compared to human artifacts, the designer must be far more intelligent and powerful than we are.” (tcapologetics.org)
This argument is simple to understand and has merit, since humans are designers by nature and it is natural to think in terms of things having purpose. It is also consistent with Rom. 1:20: “For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:”
If you found a watch in an empty field, you would logically conclude that it was designed and not the product of random formation. Likewise, when we look at life and the universe, it is natural to conclude there is a designer since we see how perfectly the universe and life forms operate. (CARM.org)
[Richard Dawkins replied to this analogy]: “A true watchmaker has foresight: he designs his cogs and springs, and plans their interconnections, with a future purpose in his mind’s eye. Natural selection, the blind, unconscious, automatic process which Darwin discovered, and which we now know is the explanation for the existence and apparently purposeful form of all life, has no purpose in mind. It has no mind and no mind’s eye. It does not plan for the future. It has no vision, no foresight, no sight at all. If it can be said to play the role of watchmaker in nature, it is the blind watchmaker.” (tcapologetics.org)
The eye is typically used as an example of design. It is a marvelous development. In order for it to work, there must be many different convergent parts that individually have no function but have value only in a designed whole. It is only in the combined total that they exhibit their total function. This function is by design.
Evolutionists have difficulty accounting for apparent design in objects like the eye, the heart, and the brain where many different parts come together to form the whole. These individual parts have no purpose except in the function of the whole. How can evolution account for these detailed congruent occurrences? … (CARM.org)
A. E. Taylor has also noted that the teleological argument suggests that nature reveals not just order, but anticipatory order, also known as the anthropic principle. The watchmaker could not have been visionless, with no foresight or sight. For example, life could not exist except in a three dimensional universe; a change of temperature of one part of a million million would rule out the very existence of the universe; and gravity could not change by even one percent, or the universe could not support life. (tcapologetics.org)
The idea that the universe is designed is subjective. Different observations in the natural world can produce different theories to account for their existence. Also, this proof is built upon an analogy. If we find things in the universe that are chaotic, then by analogy, that would imply there is no designer. [However, just because we may find some ‘chaotic’ things, that doesn’t mean that there can not be a designer; for the designer could have designed some things to be chaotic, out of design. The converse, though, does not follow the same logic: if you find things in the universe are appearing as being designed by intelligence, then it ‘does’ mean that there would be a designer, for how could they have randomly, by chance, produced such?]
(CARM.org)
Scientists such as Isaac Newton spoke of the impressive stability of the universe to demonstrate that the universe as a whole also shows intelligent design. This argument states that the world is a unified system of adaptations, and we can only give an intelligible explanation of this by believing the world was created by an intelligent being with a plan.
Finding a Designer still does not answer questions concerning the Designer’s character or attributes. For this reason, the teleological argument is often combined with the Cosmological (First Cause argument) and Ontological (the idea of ‘God’ argument) in order to provide a more comprehensive view of God which addresses issues of character as well as existence.
Ultimately, if one cannot find a Designer, one is left with either the frustration of a designed universe in which the Designer is undiscoverable, or the absurdity of an apparently designed universe that is actually the product of unintelligent matter brought together by unexplainable chance.
(tcapologetics.org)