A User’s Guide to Design Arguments

We argue that there is a tension between two types of design arguments-the fine-tuning argument (FTA) and the biological design argument (BDA). The tension arises because the strength of each argument is inversely proportional to the value of a certain currently unknown probability. Since the value of that probability is currently unknown, we investigate the properties of the FTA and BDA on different hypothetical values of this probability. If our central claim is correct this suggests three results: 1. It is not very plausible that a cumulative case for theism include both the FTA and the BDA (with one possible qualification); 2. Self-organization scenarios do not threaten theism but in fact provide the materials for a good FTA. 3. A plausible design argument of one sort or another (either FTA or BDA) will be available for a wide variety of values of the key probability. (SECTION HEADING) Introducing the Problem In general arguments from design seek to infer the existence of God from some kind of order in the universe. There are two prominent forms of design argument. First, the cosmic fine-tuning argument (hereafter “fine-tuning argument” or FTA) argues to the existence of God from facts pertaining to the initial conditions of the universe and its fundamental laws. 1 Second, the biological design argument (BDA) argues to the existence of God from facts pertaining to the existence of complex organisms. These arguments can be stated in many forms, but for precision and comparability we will limit