Wittgenstein and arguments from design

Abstract

Among the most popular arguments for God are those from design, which draw from science to argue that the universe is so finely tuned for life that it implies the existence of a designer. Wittgensteinians reply that although such arguments can convince a person that a creator exists, they do not necessarily lead to a religious belief. Wittgensteinians explain that a belief is religious because of what it is like, not what it is about, and what it is like is an aspect of a form of life. Convincing a person that a creator exists is not the same as changing their life religiously. Since arguments from design focus on the former over the latter, they often fail to develop religious beliefs. If this is convincing and such arguments aim to develop religious beliefs, supporters should reconsider the design of arguments from design. That said, Wittgensteinians are vocal in their complaints about the failures of arguments but quiet when asked to specify what a successful argument would look like. In this paper, I motivate the Wittgensteinian case against arguments from design and then outline what a successful argument needs to achieve and how it could be achieved. In doing so, this paper highlights the importance of changing lives alongside minds and encourages reflection on how arguments from design can be designed to do so