Aesthetic & Anthropic Argument (part of 3. Approaches to the Design Argument) Flashcards
Describe the dysteleological argument
- philosophers David Hume & John Stuart Mill created the dysteleological argument, which is their understanding of the problem of evil
- this is a form of the argument for poor design
Give examples used for the dysteleological argument
examples of poor design, which may simply be inefficient rather than causing evil & suffering, include:
- the pointless existence of the appendix in humans, which can lead to fatal appendicitis
- the existence of unnecessary wings in flightless birds such as ostriches
- portions of DNA that do not appear to serve any purpose
- congenital & genetic disorders such as Huntingdon’s Disease
- the common malformation of the human spinal column that leads to many painful & recurring conditions
- photosynthetic plants, which reflect green light even though the sun’s peak output is at this wavelength, whereas a more optimal system of photosynthesis would use the entire solar spectrum, resulting in black plants
What is Richard Swinburne’s “angle of probability”?
he suggested that the evidence of design & order in the universe increases the probability of the existence of God
What is Swinburne’s argument based on?
- the remarkable degree & extent of order in the universe
- the size of the universe: how does it behave in such a coherently ordered way?
- explaining regularities simply in terms of other regularities would lead to an infinite chain that offers no explanation
What does Swinburne say about ‘brute facts’?
- regularities could be accepted as ‘brute facts’ & so essentially unexplainable, but this is not ultimately satisfactory
- Swinburne acknowledges that the most general regularities of the universe can be explained by science, but that it is reasonable to postulate another source
What does Swinburne quote regarding regularity?
‘all the regularity in nature would be due to the action of a postulated [supposed] god, making [it] mature, as it were, performing a great symphony in the way in which a man produced from his throat a regular series of notes’ The Existence of God, 2005
What does Swinburne observe of the universe?
Swinburne makes a number of key observations about the universe: its fittingness for human life, its scope for humans to share in God’s creative activity, & to make significant choices
What does Swinburne quote about the universe?
‘God being omnipotent is able to produce a world orderly in these respects. And he has a good reason to choose to do so: a world containing human persons is a good thing… God being perfectly good, is generous. He wants to share’ The Existence of God, 2005
Describe Swinburne’s argument for a designed universe
Swinburne observes seven features of the universe which, he argues, increase the probability of the universe being designed:
- the very existence of the universe
- the fact that the universe is ordered
- the existence of consciousness
- human opportunities to do good
- the pattern of history
- the evidence of miracles
- religious experience
What does Swinburne argue about the providential nature of the universe?
Swinburne argues that God is the best explanation for the design that is evident in the universe, & points not only to the order & purpose that it displays but to the providential nature of the universe: it contains within it everything that is necessary for survival, & natural laws function within the universe making it a place where humans can develop
What does Swinburne argue about the justification for man on earth?
he maintains that it is a universe in which man is designed to occupy the highest position & that natural laws function within the universe making it a place where man can meaningfully contribute to its development & maintenance
What does Swinburne say about God’s justification for creating the earth?
- this kind of universe, he maintains, is the kind of universe that God would have a reason to create, & not just for humans either but for animals too
- the higher animals can reason & plan, observes Swinburne, & are enabled to do so by the predictability of the most obvious aspects of the natural world
How does Swinburne attempt to justify his probability argument?
- he claims that the probability that God exists is a probability that he considers to be greater than the probability that he does not exist
- such a God does not come under the controls of nature & he must be the only designing God because other gods would simply be unnecessary
What are the problems of Swinburne’s argument & why?
- Swinburne presumes that the universe exists for the sake of humanity, which is compatible with a theistic view of the world & may be supported by a traditional reading of the creation narratives
- however, it would surely be possible for any creature to claim that that the universe existed for its benefit if it was able to survive in it, e.g. earthworms & dinosaurs
- given that they were wiped out over a comparatively short time, perhaps the same fate awaits humans, to be replaced by another species that will consider itself to be the reason of the design of the universe
What is the problem with holding the probability that God exists?
- furthermore, to hold that there is a high degree of probability that God exists demands that we concede that other probabilities also exist, even the probability of another divine being
- philosopher F.R. Tennant responds to this, however, with the observation that when people view the universe they cannot accept that it came about by chance
- therefore, these people are more inclined to accept to probability of God, because of their mentality more than on other grounds
What is the aesthetic form of the argument?
observes that the universe possesses a natural beauty that goes beyond that which is necessary to live
Why is the aesthetic form of the argument so significant to God?
- this aspect of the universe, it is argued, shows the handicraft of God
- some of the beauty of part of order: e.g. the intricate patterns of stars & the changing colours of the seasons
Why are humans’ appreciation towards the aesthetic universe significant?
- our appreciation of it not only reflects our attraction to that which is aesthetically pleasing, but also our dislike of chaos
- in this sense, chaos is ugly & we seek to impose order upon it if it does not occur naturally
- in contrast, beauty can also found in thing that are not part of the natural world but which humankind appreciates, although they have no part to play in the survival of the species
- significant examples of this include art, music, literature & culture which all contribute to the way we perceive the world as a beneficial, appealing & attractive place, although we would would be able to live without them
Quote F.R. Tennant on his view of the aesthetic argument
‘Nature is not just beautiful in places; it is saturated with beauty - on the telescopic & microscopic scale. Our scientific knowledge brings us no nearer to understanding the beauty of music. From an intelligibility point of view, beauty seems to be superfluous [unnecessary] and to have little survival value’ Philosophical Theology, 1930
What makes the aesthetic argument universally of interest?
this aspect of the universe has long appealed to religious writers & thinkers concerned with a wider audience than the typical educated philosopher
What have religious figures noted about the aesthetic argument?
- the 19th century Jesuit poet Gerald Hopkins wrote of how the beauty of the universe is “besmirched” (contaminated) by man, & yet rises up again to reveal God’s glory: ‘The world is charged with the grandeur of God…all is smeared with toil [slaving]…nature is never spent…there lives the dearest freshness, deep down things…’
- in 1886 Swedish poet Carl Boberg wrote: ‘O Lord my God, when I in awesome wonder // Consider all the works thy hands have made // I see the stars, I hear the rolling thunder, // Thy power throughout the universe displayed’
Why does Tennant believe that the aesthetic argument is superior to others?
Tennant’s argument postulated that this view of the world was also to be considered superior to others in that it catered for moral & spiritual dimensions. He made five key observations about the universe:
- the universe is intelligible & not chaotic
- the significance of the evolutionary system is that it underpins direction & progress
- the universe is absolutely suitable to sustain life
- the created universe exhibits standards & values of aesthetic value
- humanity possesses an awareness of moral worth & works in harmony with nature
How is Swinburne’s argument from probability similar to Tennant?
- like Richard Swinburne’s argument from probability, Tennant offers a cumulative (growing) argument, suggested that once these aspects have been identified the existence of a divine designer becomes more probable than not
- he suggested that when humans see the universe they cannot accept that it is the outcome of random activity
What weakens the aesthetic argument?
the problem of evil & suffering poses a serious challenge to this form of the argument as well, although it may be possible to argue reasonably that what constitutes beauty is a matter of human perspective
Why is human perspective important when discussing the aesthetic argument?
to argue that any aspects of the world lack beauty & therefore count against the existence of God reflects only what humans believe that a loving & omnipotent God should have created, & that is to question the value of any aspects of creation is impertinent (besides the point) because God is not bound by human conceptions of perfection or adequate design
Why does the dysteleological argument not necessarily disprove God (in regards to the aesthetic argument)?
what may appear inelegant, inefficient or imperfect to humans may be perfectly fulfilling its purpose as far as God is concerned
From a logical perspective, why does the dysteleological argument (in regards to the aesthetic argument) disprove God?
if one uses the line of reasoning about void features of the earth being an example of God’s purpose as human in order to reach a logical conclusion, then we are able to say nothing at all about God
Why can beliefs about God’s design be of bias?
- some would maintain that the minimum standard God should be held to is what a reasonably competent group of “intelligent” humans could design
- if God’s designs fall short of this, then perfection has no meaning when applied to God & his creation &, if we accept the principle that the ways of God is mysterious, then in this sense nothing is incompatible with his designing of the universe & his love or his power
- to this extent, God could be pure evil & yet still compatible with classical theism, which in some ways could be seen as an undisputed absurdity
What other arguments did Tennant establish in addition to the probability of God’s existence?
having established the probability of God’s existence, Tennant extended the argument to include observations & ideas that come from evolutionary theories in the form of the anthropic principle
What is the anthropic principle?
proposes that the reason & purpose for the universe is the support of human life
Quote & explain arguments for the anthropic principle
- ‘As we look look out into the Universe and identify the many accidents of physics and astronomy that have worked together to our benefit, it almost seems as if the Universe must in some sense have known that we were coming’ The Anthropic Cosmological Principle, 1986
- In this line of reasoning, speculation about the vast, perhaps infinite, range of possible conditions in which life could not exist is compared with the speculated improbability of achieving conditions in which life does exist
- this is interpreted as indicating a fine-tuned universe specifically designed so that human life is possible
How are the anthropic principle & design argument linked (unusually)?
the anthropic principle demonstrates that, contrary to what might be suggested, the design argument need not reject the principles of evolution (i.e. overproduction, variation, adaption & selection) in order to postulate (suggest) a designed God
What makes some supporters of evolution theists?
contrary to the belief that God as a designer doesn’t interfere with the principles of evolution, theistic supporters of evolution argue that scientific principles alone are not sufficient to explain how evolution led to the perfectly balanced natural order that prevails
