1. What does Paley think we will infer about a found watch that we would not infer about a found stone?
2. Suppose you've never seen a watch made, never known a watchmaker, and cannot make a watch yourself nor understand how it is done. Would this dissuade you from believing that watches were made by watchmakers? What is this supposed to parallel?
3. According to Paley, is it necessary for a watch to be perfect to exhibit design? What is this supposed to parallel?
4. Suppose you find broken or unnecessary parts in a watch. Would you conclude it therefore had no design? What is this supposed to parallel?
5. Paley never states his argument all in one place. Louis Pojman has suggested Paley's argument looks like this:

    1. Human artifacts are products of intelligent design (purpose)
    2. The universe resembles these human artifacts.
    3. Therefore, the universe is (probably) a product of intelligent design (purpose).
    4. But the universe is vastly more complex and gigantic than a human artifact.
    5. Therefore, there probably is a powerful and vastly intelligent designer who designed the universe.

Using Pojman's version of the argument above, what possible objections could one make to this argument? How could Paley defend against those objections?
6. Suppose Paley's argument is a good one. Has he proved the existence of God, in the traditional Judeo-Christian sense of "God"? Explain.