Final answer:
William Paley's watch and watchmaker argument is best classified as a teleological argument, which examines the purposeful design of the universe to infer the existence of a divine creator, analogously to how the complex design of a watch implies a watchmaker.
Step-by-step explanation:
William Paley's watch and watchmaker argument is understood as a teleological argument. This follows from observing the intricate design of a watch, which works precisely to keep time, and deducing that such complexity implies a designer—similarly, the complex and ordered universe implies an intelligent creator. The argument likens the relationship of a watchmaker to a watch, as that of God to the universe, suggesting that just as a watch's intricate details and purposeful design necessitate a watchmaker, so too does the universe necessitate a divine creator.
The teleological argument is distinct from the cosmological argument, which reasons from the existence and order of the universe to infer a first cause or necessary being, and the ontological argument, which uses the concept of a maximally perfect being to prove God's existence logically. Paley's argument is specifically teleological because it focuses on the purpose and design in the universe, moving to the conclusion that there must be a designer responsible for this order and complexity. Thus, William Paley's watch and watchmaker argument would be understood as a teleological argument, not a cosmological or ontological one.