Chance, Intelligibility, and the Watchmaker Argument
Among St. Thomas Aquinas’s Five Ways for demonstrating the existence of God, the Fifth Way—often called the argument from governance or finality—has frequently been conflated with what is popularly known as the “argument from design,” William Paley’s “watchmaker argument,” or modern forms of “intelligent design.” While these arguments share a family resemblance, Aquinas’s Fifth Way differs from them in method, metaphysical depth, and philosophical ambition. At its core, the Fifth Way is not an inference from complexity alone, but an argument from the intelligibility, regularity, and ordered directedness of nature toward an intellect that grounds and sustains that order. A careful comparison clarifies both the strengths of Aquinas’s approach and the limited, though pedagogically useful, role of the watchmaker analogy.
The Fifth Way and the Governance of the World
Aquinas’s Fifth Way begins with an observation about the natural world: non-rational beings consistently act for ends. Natural entities lacking intelligence—such as physical bodies, plants, and even fundamental natural processes—regularly operate in ways that conduce to determinate outcomes. This ordered regularity is what Aquinas calls the governance of the world. [1] Importantly, this is not merely a claim about biological complexity but about intelligibility itself: nature is lawlike, stable, and knowable.
The constancy of natural laws and the fixed ranges within which reality operates make science, technology, adaptation, and even evolution possible. Were there no stable principles or governing norms, reality would be unintelligible and uninhabitable. The Fifth Way thus presupposes what the Catechism of the Catholic Church affirms: that creation reflects divine wisdom and order, such that “God created the world according to his wisdom”.[2]
An analogy helps clarify this point. Consider a master painter. The detail, harmony, proportions, and coherence of a finished painting reveal not only the existence of an artist, but the intellect, intention, and skill that guided the work. Similarly, the beauty, hierarchy of species, cyclic patterns of nature, generation and corruption, and harmonious “economies” of existence testify to a directing intelligence. The emphasis is not on isolated complexity, but on the pervasive orientation of things toward intelligible ends.
Distinction from the Watchmaker Argument
William Paley’s watchmaker argument famously invites the reader to imagine discovering a watch on the ground and inferring a designer due to its intricate arrangement of parts. This analogy is effective for introducing the idea of design to a general audience, particularly those untrained in metaphysics. However, Paley’s argument differs fundamentally from Aquinas’s Fifth Way.
First, Paley reasons primarily from complexity to design, whereas Aquinas reasons from final causality to intellect. Aquinas does not depend on the improbability of complexity but on the directedness of natural processes themselves. Second, Paley’s argument can be misinterpreted as suggesting that God merely assembles pre-existing materials, like a craftsman assembling a machine. Aquinas, by contrast, situates the Fifth Way within the broader metaphysical framework established by the first four Ways: God is the First Cause, the source of being itself, who creates and sustains all things ex nihilo.[3]
Moreover, Aquinas explicitly avoids treating God as a distant artificer who acts only at the beginning of creation. Divine providence extends to all things, including particulars.[4] Creation is not a one-time act but an ongoing participation of creatures in God’s causality. In this sense, the world is not merely designed like a watch and left to run; it is continuously governed and directed by divine intellect and will.
Chance, Providence, and Modern Misunderstandings
Modern objections often appeal to chance or randomness as alternatives to divine governance. Yet Aquinas offers a more precise account. While chance exists in the sense that multiple causal lines may intersect unpredictably from a limited human perspective, nothing is truly uncaused or unintelligible from the standpoint of divine providence.[5]
What scientists describe as randomness—such as the outcome of a coin toss—arises from the complexity and opacity of causal factors, not from the absence of causality itself. Air resistance, weight distribution, force, angle, and environmental conditions all contribute determinately to the outcome, even if they are not fully measurable. Thus, “chance” functions as an epistemic placeholder rather than a metaphysical explanation.
To invoke chance as an ultimate explanation for the profound intelligibility of reality risks collapsing into a form of scientism that takes order for granted without accounting for its source. As Aquinas insists, intelligibility itself demands explanation. If reality is ordered in such a way that rational minds can consistently discover and articulate its laws, then that order ultimately points beyond itself to an ordering intellect.
Conclusion
The Fifth Way is neither a primitive version of the watchmaker argument nor a simple appeal to biological complexity. It is a metaphysical argument rooted in the intelligibility, regularity, and purposiveness of nature as such. While the watchmaker analogy may serve as a useful introduction for certain audiences, it lacks the ontological depth of Aquinas’s account of divine governance. Properly understood, the Fifth Way reveals that the order of the world is not the product of blind chance, but the expression of a provident intellect who not only initiates creation but sustains it in being. Analogies inevitably and universally fall short when speaking of God—but when carefully employed, they can still point the mind toward the truth of a reality.
FN:
