One of the most enduring philosophical arguments to prove the existence of God has been the so-called ‘argument from design’. This argument has many variations, but the core of the argument rests with the claim that the universe is simply too well ordered to have resulted from chance. In this paper I will argue that this is not necessarily the case however, as there are other explanations which can account for the appearance of design. To do this I will set out the basic claims of the design argument, then I will investigate three counterclaims which cast serious doubt over it, as they question whether the universe is as well organised as the design argument claims (and why there are defects), whether evolution can account for the appearance of design and whether it is in fact our human faculties which order reality. It will therefore be necessary to investigate a wide range of philosophical literature, but for the purposes of this paper Kant’s work is particularly important as he produces a series of strong arguments against the philosophical proof of God and the way in which the human faculties structure existence. This will show that it is not possible to convincingly argue for the existence of God from the appearance of design in the universe, and rather than looking for a being with attributes that we would normally associate with God, we need look no further than ourselves and how we ‘design’ reality through our intellectual capacities. Using a combination of the responses put forward against the argument from design, which is particularly well represented in an essay by Nietzsche, I will argue that it is the way in which experience is represented to us that gives us the impression of intelligent design, and that it is this distance from our representation that causes us to search for an external designer or creator of reality.