Teleological argument

===Socrates and the pre-Socratics===
[[File:Sanzio 01 Plato Aristotle.jpg|thumb|upright|Plato and [[Aristotle]], depicted here in ''[[The School of Athens]]'', both developed philosophical arguments addressing the universe's apparent order (''[[logos]]'')]]

The argument from intelligent design appears to have begun with [[Socrates]], although the concept of a cosmic intelligence is older and [[David Sedley]] has argued that Socrates was developing an older idea, citing [[Anaxagoras of Clazomenae]], born about 500 BC, as a possible earlier proponent.<ref name=mcpherr/><ref name=ahbel/><ref name=sed/> The proposal that the order of nature showed evidence of having its own human-like "intelligence" goes back to the origins of Greek natural philosophy and science, and its attention to the orderliness of nature, often with special reference to the revolving of the heavens. Anaxagoras is the first person who is definitely known to have explained such a concept using the word "''[[nous]]''" (which is the original Greek term that leads to modern English "intelligence" via its Latin and French translations). Aristotle reports an earlier philosopher from [[Clazomenae]] named [[Hermotimus of Clazomenae|Hermotimus]] who had taken a similar position.<ref>''[[Metaphysics (Aristotle)|Metaphysics]]'' I.4.[https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Aristot.+Met.+1.984b 984b].</ref> Amongst [[Pre-Socratic philosophers]] before Anaxagoras, other philosophers had proposed a similar intelligent ordering principle causing life and the rotation of the heavens. For example [[Empedocles]], like [[Hesiod]] much earlier, described cosmic order and living things as caused by a cosmic version of [[love]],<ref>Kirk, Raven, and Schofield. 1983. ''The Presocratic Philosophers'' (2nd ed.). Cambridge: [[Cambridge University Press]]. ch. 10.</ref> and [[Pythagoras]] and [[Heraclitus]] attributed the cosmos with "[[reason]]" (''[[logos]]'').<ref>Kirk, Raven, and Schofield. 1983. ''The Presocratic Philosophers'' (2nd ed.). Cambridge: [[Cambridge University Press]]. pp. 204, 235.</ref> In his ''[[Philebus]]'' 28c [[Plato]] has Socrates speak of this as a tradition, saying that "all philosophers agree—whereby they really exalt themselves—that mind (''[[nous]]'') is king of heaven and earth. Perhaps they are right." and later states that the ensuing discussion "confirms the utterances of those who declared of old that mind (''nous'') always rules the universe".<ref>[https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0174%3Atext%3DPhileb.%3Apage%3D28 28c] and [https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0174%3Atext%3DPhileb.%3Apage%3D30 30d]. Translation by Fowler.</ref>

Xenophon's report in his ''[[Memorabilia (Xenophon)|Memorabilia]]'' might be the earliest clear account of an argument that there is evidence in nature of intelligent design.<ref name="ahbel">Ahbel-Rappe, Sara. 2009. ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=GKewlVwJ9rgC Socrates: A Guide for the Perplexed]''. {{ISBN|9780826433251}}. [https://books.google.com/books?id=GKewlVwJ9rgC&pg=PA27 p. 27].</ref> The word traditionally translated and discussed as "design" is ''[[wikt:γνώμη|gnōmē]]'' and Socrates is reported by Xenophon to have pressed doubting young men to look at things in the market, and consider whether they could tell which things showed evidence of ''gnōmē'', and which seemed more to be by blind chance, and then to compare this to nature and consider whether it could be by blind chance.<ref name="mcpherr">{{Citation |last=McPherran |first=Mark |title=The Religion of Socrates |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=nWfQx1CjZl0C&q=socrates+religion+%22intelligent+design%22&pg=PA274 |year=1996 |publisher=The Pennsylvania State University Press |isbn=978-0271040325}}, pp. 273–75.</ref><ref name="sed">{{Citation |last=Sedley |first=David |title=Creationism and Its Critics in Antiquity |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=SgRuJEfzUG8C |year=2007 |publisher=University of California Press |isbn=9780520934368}}.</ref> In Plato's ''[[Phaedo]]'', Socrates is made to say just before dying that his discovery of Anaxagoras' concept of a cosmic ''nous'' as the cause of the order of things, was an important turning point for him. But he also expressed disagreement with Anaxagoras' understanding of the implications of his own doctrine, because of Anaxagoras' [[materialism|materialist]] understanding of [[Causality|causation]]. Socrates complained that Anaxagoras restricted the work of the cosmic ''nous'' to the beginning, as if it were uninterested and all events since then just happened because of causes like air and water.<ref>[https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0170%3Atext%3DPhaedo%3Apage%3D97 97]-[https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0170%3Atext%3DPhaedo%3Apage%3D98 98]. Also see Ahbel Rappe.</ref> Socrates, on the other hand, apparently insisted that the demiurge must be "loving", particularly concerning humanity. (In this desire to go beyond Anaxagoras and make the cosmic ''nous'' a more active manager, Socrates was apparently preceded by [[Diogenes of Apollonia]].)<ref name=ahbel />; {{harvcoltxt|McPherran|1996|p=290}}; and <ref>Kirk, Raven, and Schofield. 1983. ''The Presocratic Philosophers'' (2nd ed.). Cambridge: [[Cambridge University Press]]. ch. XVI</ref>