Is creator really the creator?
I was really intrigued by the teleological argument also known as “Watchmaker analogy”, which states that: design of creation (Like a watch) implies a designer. This theory was considered to be backbone of many theological discourses. Although, there have been many counter arguments against this analogy, which started with the publication of Charles Darwin’s theory of natural selection in 1859. My purpose here is not to provide any criticism today, but to check validity of teleological argument epistemologically.
The case states that: if there is a design in the creation, there should be a creator. If you notice, we are exerting a constraint of human rationality to explain something which is irrational, or as Albert Camus puts it in another word “Absurd”. Therefore, It would be irrational to comprehend probability of creation without a creator. By using this argument we have come to a conclusion that: there is a creator who has created everything in the universe, cosmos and so on.
But the argument cannot end here. We wanted to explain the absurdity of the universe and therefore we created a creator, but the same question applies to the creator. Who is the designer of the creator? If our answer is: The creator is the first, the last and the eternal. Then we are back to square one of the loop. If we are okay with the absurdity of creator having no creator then we should have never started the argument with “design having a designer”.
By using this argument we are basically trying to explain the absurdity of conundrum using the irrationality of another. If you are dissatisfied with my reasoning, I would like to have your opinion on this argument. As said by François de La Rochefoucauld, “If we had no faults we should not take so much pleasure in noting those of others.”