The Design Argument

According to Wikipedia, the teleological argument, or argument from design^[1][2][3], is an argument for the existence of God or a creator based on perceived evidence of order, purpose, design, or direction — or some combination of these — in nature. A modern variation of the teleological argument is built upon the anthropic principle. The anthropic principle is derived from the apparent delicate balance of conditions necessary for human life. In this line of reasoning, speculation about the vast, perhaps infinite, range of possible conditions in which life could not exist is compared to the speculated improbability of achieving conditions in which life does exist, and then interpreted as indicating a fine-tuned universe specifically designed so human life is possible.

Is "design" in nature real or an illusion? Consider the following arguments against design:

Life is indeed complex but it does not imply design. Diamonds and snowflakes are complex but are not designed. A true understanding of evolution reveals many life-forms superficially look designed, however, many are actually "poorly designed" by reasonable standards. Is this the work of an intelligent designer? Read this blogger's previous posts on Intelligent Design and the Argument from Ignorance for further elaboration.

The universe as a whole at first look seems purposeful and orderly. However, upon closer inspection, its true function seems questionable.
George H. Smith, in his book Atheism: The Case Against God, points out what he considers to be a fatal flaw in the argument from design:

Consider the idea that nature itself is the product of design. How could this be demonstrated? Nature, as we have seen, provides the basis of comparison by which we distinguish between designed objects and natural objects. We are able to infer the presence of design only to the extent that the characteristics of an object differ from natural characteristics. Therefore, to claim that nature as a whole was designed is to destroy the basis by which we differentiate between artifacts and natural objects. Evidences of design are those characteristics not found in nature, so it is impossible to produce evidence of design within the context of nature itself. Only if we first step beyond nature, and establish the existence of a supernatural designer, can we conclude that nature is the result of conscious planning. (p. 268)

- - - - -
 Comment:  Below is a brief statement regarding the "Fine Tuning" Argument ---

It is this blogger's opinion that one cannot talk about probability of anything in our universe happening until we know what all of the possibilities are. If our universe is larger that we think now, if our universe is infinite, if there are many multiverses and/or there are an infinite number of universes, then the chances of our world and everything in it increase significantly. Thus, presently, this argument of probability should not be used.