AS Philo part b) teleo argument

I know people are having trouble with part b's, so here's a good example plan of a philosophy part B. I haven't written it out in full, but you get the idea, and I'll write it up in full when I have more time on my hands.

b) Evaluate whether the teleological argument stands up to criticism. (10)

I believe that the teleological argument does stand up to criticism.

First paragraph:
Point: Based on Natural Theology, we can observe order, purpose and regularity (OPR) in the world, therefore it is difficult to criticise the first premise of the teleological argument's logic.
Counter-point: The OPR in the world does not necessarily suggest there is a designer - Darwinism/evolution/natural selection shows that complexity can exist without a designer.
Counter-counter-point: Evolution could have been part of God's plan - God created a design with the potential to improve itself, therefore the design argument is still valid.

Second paragraph:
Point: One of Hume's criticisms is that the world is imperfect, therefore couldn't have been designed. However Aquinas/Paley never said that the world was perfect in their arguments, they just stated that OPR suggests a designer. 
Counter-point: Mill's criticism develops the idea of imperfections, states that evil in the world suggests that either there is an evil designer or no designer, and the latter option is more likely.
Counter-counter-point: There are other reasons for the existence of evil, for example God allowing us to have free will/be moral. There is still complexity, therefore this still points to there being a designer.

Conclusion: argument does stand up to criticism. Some strong criticisms put forward by Hume and Mill, but they do little to disprove the teleo argument.


Hope this helps!