This is a well-worn topic, I think - but one I am inclined to revisit in light of certain, recent threads. As the below does not really follow those threads, I present it as a separate topic. Of all the arguments (categorically speaking) for the exitence of God, Paley's Teleological Proof is the one I find most compelling and, as such, interesting. In his book Natural Theology: Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity, Collected from the Appearances of Nature, Paley asserts the classic Watchmaker Theory: Suppose that you come across a watch, having no prior knowledge of anything related to how such a thing could exist... ". . . when we come to inspect the watch, we perceive. . . that its several parts are framed and put together for a purpose...The inference we think is inevitable, that the watch must have had a maker - that there must have existed...an artificer or artificers who formed it for the purpose which we find it actually to answer, who comprehended its construction and designed its use. " In short, the fact that a watch has such a specific construction indicates that there must be a designer/creator responsible for its construction. Likewise, if the all the elements of the universe mesh as well together as (for instance) the gears of a watch, should it not be concluded that said universe must have been the product of a designer/creator as well... *** For the record, I embrace an atheist view of the universe and find this particular teleology flawed - but unlike many popular (or lacking popularity, well known) theories on the "logical necessity" of God (e.g. various Cosmological and Ontological theories), I think this one speaks to an Objective Realism that most peolple (myself included) employ consistently in their apprehension of existence. Do you agree with this concept? If not, how is it faulty?