criticisms of DA from DH

Question 1

argument 1 - god as the designer

Answer 1

even if the universe was designed, there is no evidence that this is the god of xn theism, a lesser being could have designed the universe. hume is using his guiding principle here - although the inference that the designer is all-powerful, all-knowing and all-loving may be true, it is out of proportion to the evidence.

hume explores the idea of a limited designer:

• wherever we find intelligent minds we find them attached to physical bodies, so the designer could have a body, could have been mortal and died a long time ago
• design is often a feature of teamwork, so there may be many designers or ‘junior’ gods - scale+curtains analogy

Question 2

what is hume’s guiding principle?

Answer 2

a cause must be proportional to its effect

Question 3

argument 2 - evil

Answer 3

hume referenced epicurus’ inconsistent triad and noted that these questions remained unanswered:
god is omnipotent
god is omnibenevolent
evil exists

hume asked;
either god is willing to prevent but unable - he is impotent
he is able but not willing - he is malevolent
he is both able AND willing - then why is there evil

Question 4

argument 3 - unsound analogies

Answer 4

the analogy between the way the universe works and the way a machine works is incorrect, as the world is more like a large floating vegetable, and vegetables grow themselves without the need for a designer

hume’s ideas seem to anticipate darwin’s TOE, which in the ops of most evolutionary biologists, is not directed by an external agent such as god, so hume has some powerful support

Question 5

argument 4 - anthropomorphism

Answer 5

paley’s analogy is anthropomorphic as it attempts to explain the universe in terms of our own understanding about the world.
our experience of design is limited to machines we design ourselves, so in effect we are imagining god to be like a human designer.

we cannot assume that we can apply our limited exp of life on this world to the universe as a whole

Question 6

argument 5 - order

Answer 6

the universe could have developed into this ‘ordered’ state as we see it now completely by chance

this is hume’s ‘epicurean hypothesis’ - since the world is nothing less or more than changing arrangements of its atoms, given infinite time it was inevitable that atoms should arrive at an ordered state

21st century physics offers a refined version of these ideas in the multiverse theory - there are many universes, some chaotic, some semi ordered, some completely ordered. this does not disprove the existence of god, but it would support hume’s argument that we can explain the universe without needing to appeal to God.

Question 7

summary of debate between hume and the strengths?

Answer 7

G od - xn god or no?
E vil - explanation for evil in the universe?
EvolutionVegetable- does the argument work with TOE? is the world a machine or a vegetable lol?
A nthropomorphism - does paley’s use of language fail to create a good analogy
O rder - is the universe ordered by chance, or does the AP have a point?
S implicity - does the simplicity of the argument make it stronger?