Philosophical Argument In The Poem Design

There is an observable connection between the poem “Design” by Robert Frost and the philosophical argument proposed by Gottfried Leibniz in God, Evil, and the Best of All Possible Worlds revolving around the conception and intentions of God. There is also a slim connection with William Paley’s, Natural Theology. The poem draws from both pieces in attempting to justify how God plays a role in the creation of nature and the realm around humanity. The poem is structured to allow both arguments to flow subsequently. Frost attempts to make the reader query the design of the world as well as the intentions and considerations that were formed during the creation of the world, which nonetheless joins the two philosophical arguments together. Concentrating on the first philosophical argument the poem attempts to illuminate, simulates the questions: Why are we here? Were we made this way? This is reflected from the New Design
The question the poem emphasizes is one in which why evil has to be a dark horse in this world as well as in what way simple things came to be. According to Leibniz, if all God was concerned about was to create no evil and suffering, the easiest mechanism would have been to design no world at all. In order to produce good, you need evil. In Natural Theology, “The Design Argument” was challenged by Darwinism, which disputed the evidence that we were created for the environment, but stated that we adapted to the environment. It was deemed, “survival of the fittest,” which can be applied to the poem. In nature, the fittest will survive—in Frost’s case, the spider survived over the moth. The white spider and the moth are a symbol for the faultlessness of God’s creation and the evil that has entered it by natural