In Richard Dawkins' essay on Darwin's Wasp, he makes the argument that the role of nature is to ensure the survival of the DNA. Inductive argumentation begins by observing the wasp's behavior. As Dawkins observes, the wasp inserts its stinger into the caterpillar's central nervous system and paralyzes it. Next, the wasp implants a larva. The larvae eat the caterpillar alive. It may seem cruel to the human mind if we apply the concept of suffering to this process, but ultimately it is nature at work. He cites several primary sources of data, including the wasp's behavior towards the cheetah and gazelle. This inductive thought process illustrates and supports Darwin's theory of natural selection. Dawkins further argues that intentional design is an illusion. In doing so, Dawkins cites the work of William Paley as a secondary source to assert his own view that there is no divine creator. Paley points out that if a watch has a watchmaker, it follows that living bodies have a divine designer. But Dawkins argues that this can't be true, because Darwin proved that living bodies exist because DNA makes it possible. It is this specific inductive argument for the survival of DNA that Dawkins uses to refute the idea of ​​intentional design. We can infer here that Dawkins wishes to prove that what humans think they know about God is at best an illusion. Ultimately, nature rules. Conversely, we can examine the deductive argument of St. Thomas Aquinas in “The King of the Bees” to understand his view of God. He posits the principle that the best way to govern is through royalty. Aquinas uses God as his primary source to support his argument. Specifically, Samuel 13:14, "The LORD hath sought him as one after his own heart" is cited for...... middle of paper...... for some purpose, but if we If we tried to reverse engineer an organism, we would fail. We can't hear him the same way, because we don't know what he wants. To support this inference, Dawkins cites the example of a cheetah and a gazelle. On the one hand, the cheetah is made to kill the gazelle. Conversely, the gazelle is made to survive, which defeats the purpose of the cheetah. The logical induction is that this cannot be God's use. Dawkins concludes that this is the utility function of DNA and that it "actually explains the 'purpose' of the cheetah and the gazelle" (Dawkins, 1995). By deduction, we conclude that nature is neutral and that organisms exist simply because they exist. It seems almost zen. Works Cited Dawkins, R. (November 1995). The utilitarian function of God. Retrieved July 13, 2011 from http://www.godslasteraar.org/assets/ebooks/Dawkins_Gods_Utility_Function_sec.pdf