The argument of design is often referred to as the Argument from Design, with the idea in mind that the person is arguing from the existence of "design" in the universe and to the logical conclusion that the design requires a "designer" (i.e. their god). However, I believe that it is a horribly false assumption to believe that "design" exists in our universe. Instead, I believe, what is required is an argument to design - the person attempting to prove a god must first give just cause why anyone should believe that something called "design" can be distinguished in the natural world. Only then can an argument from that design and to a god be attempted. Personally I believe that more than less the argument to design focuses less on the actual design and more on the purpose of this alleged design. Purpose, is thought of the point of design, and the Teleological Argument (tele = purpose) is a type of Design Argument. .
William Paley, quoted from a writing in his book Natural Theology:.
There cannot be design without a designer; contrivance without a contriver; order without choice; arrangement without anything capable of arranging; subservience and relation to a purpose without that which could intend a purpose; means suitable to an end, and executing their office in accomplishing that end without ever having been contemplated or the means accommodated to it. Arrangement, disposition of parts, subservience of means to an end, relation of instruments to a use imply the presence of intelligence and mind. .
Paley is particularly famous for drawing an analogy from human watches. He argues that if someone found a watch on a beach they would never be able to conclude that it had been produced by some means other than intelligent design and purpose (i.e. design for it to produce an accurate measure of time). .
Conversely is it is difficult to provide an understandable explanation of the Design Argument because of its primary weakness: it relies heavily upon personal, subjective interpretation.