Author argues that there are no formal fallacies in the argument from design, if the argument is articulated with suffi cient care. According to modern science, he distinguishes two types of order or harmony in the world: regularities of co-presence and regularities of succession. He goes on to claim that Hume’s criticism directed against the argument from design, presented in Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, used as its premises regularities of co-presence other than those produced by men, and did not appeal to the operation of regularities of succession. But a more developed science than Hume knew, more often appeals to the analogy of the order between the regularities of succession produced by human agents and those produced by the operation of natural laws. How strong this analogy is depends on whether the conclusion of the argument from design is true.
Publication order reference