The design argument in theology is often
immediately
identified with the “argument from
design,” i.e., the
argument that from evidences of intelligent
planning
found in the world one may reasonably infer the exist-
ence of a purposeful Intelligence
responsible for the
world. Logically, however, the full design
argument
(or teleological argument) must be seen as more com-
plex in structure, since the argument from
design itself
rests on the controversial premiss that there are sig-
nificant similarities between objects in
nature (or nature
taken as a whole), on the one hand, and objects intelli-
gently contrived by man for some
purpose, on the
other. Only after somehow supporting this preliminary
analogical basis, which, if formalized, amounts to an
“argument
to (not from) design,” can one properly
even begin to move on
“from” design to invoke the
theoretical need for a
deity as cosmic Designer. His-
torically
both aspects have appeared in theological
speculation, although more
explicit attention has usu-
ally been paid to
the move from apparently purposeful
natural phenomena to a divine Purposer
than to the
logically prior question of the actual presence of pur-
poseful design in nature.
