Argument for the existence of God: Design Argument. COPY Flashcards

1
Q

A posteriori

A

Arguments that depend on sense experience

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Empirical

A

argument that is based on the experience of the senses (smell, touch)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Inductive

A

When used of arguments, refers to those based on probability

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Analogical

A

It is based on a comparison between the features of 2 different things. Attempt to explain meaning of something

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Natural theology

A

View that questions Gods existence, nature + attributes can be answered by reasoning, science and observation rather than appeal to special revelation.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Special revelation

A

Refers to scripture or some form of religious experience.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

THE DESIGN ARGUMENT AO1

Paley’s arguments

A

A POSTERIORI: 1) its empirical in nature 2) its based on the sense experience.
INDUCTIVE: 1)Based on probability + not knock-down proof 2) conclusion is not necessarily true: stronger the evidence more likely to be true.
ANALOGICAL: 1) Based on the comparison of 2 different things.
PALEY’S arguments uses the approach to natural theology- makes no appeal to any form of special revelation (BIBLE OR RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE)
-Uses reason, latest scientific knowledge + observation.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

THE DESIGN ARGUMENT

PALEY’S BOOK ( natural theology) published 1802

A
  • complexity
  • purpose ( design qua purpose) Teleological argument
  • Regularity(design qua regularity)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

PALEY ANOLOGICAL DESIGN ARGUEMENT

A

At his time, Paley had the most effective way of arguing for the existence of God.
-He uses the watch analogy:
1) A watch couldn’t have appeared by accident
2) existence of the watch gives proof of a watch maker
Thus, the universe couldn’t have came about by accident, as its intricate design eg: molecular structure of ice
“The watch had a watch maker”
“We must also argue from the world a world maker”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

DESIGN QUA PURPOSE

A

Everything in this world has a purpose like the watch for telling the time. He linked the example of an eye.

The eye has lots of intrinsic part which allows us to see.
He believes the eye is due to an intelligent designer. God gave us the ability to see.
Birds feathers, bones and wings = perfect for flight.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

DESIGN QUA REGULARITY

A

Order of the universe suggests a designer. Paley used astronomy to show this, Newton’s laws of motion to prove the design of the universe is intrinsic. He suggest the motion and orbits of the planets have not come by chance. Thus, there must be something greater imposing order- GOD.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Things to note about PALEYS DA

A
  • Treats world as a mechanical object which is comparable to things humans make.
  • concerned with order and purpose
  • uses principles of “similar effects + causes” (watchmaker)
  • concern with proportion- watchmaker + worldmaker, both intelligent designs but are hugely different
  • He is motivated due to his religious faith
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Criticisms of DA

A

starter: “Hume’s criticisms of the design arguments may be applied to Paley’s argument” ( from different times in history)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Criticisms of DA

HUME; MECHANIST ANALOGIES ARE INAPPROPIATE

A

Starter: “Hume’s criticisms of the design arguments may be applied to Paley’s argument” ( from different times in history)
David Hume:
Mechanistic analogies are inappropriate:
- Deliberate analogies are chosen as they encourage the idea of a designer.
-Living organisms would be more appropriate eg:vegatable.
- Hume suggested due to changing arrangements of atoms over an infinite period of time, it was inevitable order would emerge.
-Suggested the possibility universe alternates between periods of order + chance, existence is currently period of order.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

criticisms of DA

HUME; MECHANIST ANALOGY IS ANTHROPOMORPHIC

A

Anthropomorphic ( language connects human characteristics or ideas to non human ethics):
-humans have no knowledge on how the universe are made.
-Thus we nothing about the capacities or nature of any universe designer
-mechanist analogy creates the universe designer in our image
..The designer might not be the God of Christian theism
-cause must be proportional to its effects
-Traditional Christian understanding of God isint required by what is known of the universe.
- intelligent minds are attached to physical bodies, so the designer could be mortal or long dead.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

criticisms of DA

Problem of Evil

A
  • The existence of much moral + natural evil in the world is evidence the world is flawed
  • Hume considered God’s omnipotence + omnibenevolence as incompatible to the existence of evil.
17
Q

Evaluation of Paley’s DA

WEAKNESSES

A

1) Existence of evil suggests incompetent or malevolent designer - or no designer
2) Universe could’ve “designed itself” by chance. Support for this multiverse theories.
3) Claims made by theism about the nature of a designer God go beyond the evidence
4) Apparent order + purpose + design are chance. Support from Darwin + Dawkins.

18
Q

Evaluation of Paleys DA

STRENGTHS

A

1) Swinburne explanation = existence of single omnipotent God = explanation
2) PALEY= evil is unavoidable for God to bring good. (Free will defence/ Process theodicy/ Hick’s ireneaean theodicy.
3) Evolution requires explanation (Swinburne) Not compatible without theism.
4) Paley= “Nature shows intention” supported by ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE. ( multiverse theory is incapable of truth.)

19
Q

ARGUMENT CANNOT offer proof of God

A

1) Only deductive arguments can give absolute proof.
DA is inductive, so can never be certain.
2) Paley’s observations cannot be explained naturally. e.g: regular rotation of the planets is due to gravity
if multiverse theory = true then design is pure chance.

20
Q

ARGUMENT CAN offer proof of God

A

1) Most things in life based off inductive arguments. “true beyond reasonable doubt” stronger evidence = more probable true the claims.
2) some saw, laws of nature = explanation, not sure multiverse theory is true. Challenges do not diminish probability that Paley’s argument= true.

21
Q

Relevance to Religious faith

POSITIVE

A

Paleys argument =
-Rationally + empirically based
-consistent with Biblical teaching= guiding presence directing human life + nature in purposeful way.
-THEISTS can’t prove God, nor can atheists disprove:
Both rely on reasoning + empirical evidence.
Paley’s Argument = provides strong support for theists, with simplicity + reinforcement of cosmological argument.
- (according to H.H price, faith should include “belief that” acceptance + “belief in” trust)
Paleys Argument = evidence to support “belief that” God exists. + his description of worlds design encourages “belief in” God.

22
Q

RTRF

NEGATIVE

A

FIDEISTS: Rational argument play no part in faith = doesn’t lead to commitment. (only faith gives certainty)
Paley’s argument does not tackle problem of evil.

23
Q

Anthropic principle ?

A

Boundary conditions (cosmological constants) had to be precise for intelligent life to develop. - Not here be chance, God “fine tuned” these conditions.

24
Q

FIDEISM ?

A

View that religion is a matter of pure faith in sense of commitment. Rational argument has no role to play.