issues Flashcards
humes objection to the design argument from analogy
an argument from analogy claims that because x is like y in one observed respect they are therefore probably alike in another hidden respect.
eg
p1 x and y share a number of similar features
p2 x actually has a feature of being caused by a designer
conc, therefore, y also must have the feature of being caused by a designer
we simply lack enough experience of worlds being made to draw any conclusion about their origins
cleanthes teleological argument rest is that like effect have like causes- two things that are similar in their effect have similar causes
machine and the universe exhibit similar features of design like effects
therefore they have both been designed by some intelligent being like causes.
the question is does a machine have enough relevant similarities with the universe to support the conclusion that they were both designed?
hume argues that the universe resembles something more organic than mechanical.
if this was correct, a vegetable doesn’t have any designer hence no reason to suppose that the universe is designed.
however both are flawed comparisons.
comparing the universe to a machine brings out some potential absurdities. list
trial and error
many gods
god is like hooman
trial and error
most cases complex machines are the product of many years of trial and error, with each new generation of machines an improvement on its predecessors.
if the universe was to be considered as a machine then many worlds might have been botched and bungled before this one was created.
the universe could be a product of trial and error, suggesting that the designer of the universe would be far from the perf3ect being that the argument is suppose to prove.
single vs many
complex machines are not usually the product of a single brilliant designer. instead, teams of people are involved in their design and construction. so by the like cause principle, the universe may also have been designed and created by man gods, not by a single deity.
god is more hooman
the designer and constructor of complex machines can be foolish and morally weak people.
the same way the gods who built the universe may well be foolish and morally weak.
humans involved in manufacturing are both male and female and reproduce in the usual fashion so perhaps the deities are gendered and also engaged in reproduction.
the problem of spatial disorder- hume
design argument describes the spatial order we expect to see throughout the universe the incredible arrangement of the different parts of the natural world fitting together and working to some purpose.
the universe they would describe would be very different from this one as this universe contains too much vice and misery and disorder to justify belief in such a god.
where there are design faults in machines we usually ginger that the designer lacked resources or skill or just didn’t care.
do these faults exist because the universe was created by a god who lacked the power skill or love to create something better or it was created by an infant or a senile god.
the issues of disorder as raised by paley
people might observe problems in the functioning of the watch eg irregularity of movement or simply a failure for it to work after all the watch may have been lying on that particular heath for weeks before discovery.
however, you would still be able to observe the details of the machinery the cog and gears and all the qualities.
for paley it is not necessary that a machine be perfect in order to be designed all that is important is that the machine exhibits some sort of purpose
whether or not the mechanism actually works these qualities in themselves still lead us to the conclusion that the watch was designed.
even if it could be shown that the existence of pain and suffering was a flaw in the working of the universe it would not, therefore, follow that God did not exist.
hence may not be fatal for a teleological argument.
issues the failure of the design argument because it is an argument from a unique case
basics
we need to build up a large data bank of experiences so that we can recognise which effects/ causes are alike and which cause/ effects are not alike.
we don’t have any experience at all of the universes being made so we have no experience with universe-like causes
we only have no experience of the effect of the universe being made this universe and worst still we only have experience of one tiny fraction of the universe- this narrow corner.
hume on causation and constant conjunction
hume suggest that what we mean and experience as cause and effect is really just the constant conjunction of events. the feeling of one event inevitable following the other is the result of repetition and is little more than custom or habit.
caused= constant conjunction ( constantly observed together)
event x causes event y= we have repeatedly observed events of type x in conjunction with events of type y
x was designed by y= we have repeatedly observed designed objects of type x in conjunction with design of type y
standard form
p1 design arguments make the inference that this universe and its properties were caused by a designer.
p2 we can make an inference that x caused y only if we have repeatedly observed event x conjoined to event y
p3 we have observed only one universe this universe and its properties are a unique case.
p4 and we have never observed the origins of any universe
conc 1 therefore we can’t make any inference about the cause and origins of this universe and its properties
conc 2 therefore design arguments are based on an invalid inference
defence by paley
there are certain intrinsic features possessed by certain objects which show that they are designed
no one had witnessed the Antikythera mechanism being constructed it is sort of a unique case the people who analysed it concluded that it had been designed and built.
paley may be attempting to deflect hume criticism that we have no experience of worlds and hence cant draw any conclusion from the basis of a world to how that world may have come about. for Paley even though we’re ignorant of the design process it is still legitimate it to infer the existence of a designer from mysterious objects that exhibit all the characteristics od design.
hume response
we can compare it to other manufactured objects that we have previously encountered so the Antikythera mechanism and other one-off objects like to arent really unique cases.
we have no experience at all of the process that causes the universe to come into being a universe is a unique case and there is nothing we can compare it to.
on grounds of Humes empiricism because we have now experience of this universe that has been designed then we have insufficient reason for concluding that god or anyone else has designed it and the design argument fails
issues: whether god is the best or only explanation
design arguments proceed from observation of the natural universe to a conclusion that the best explanation for these phenomena is the existence of a designer that has god-like attributes of immense intelligence consciousness power etc.
the appearance of design may be explained by natural or random processes
another alt to the claim that the universe with its appearance of purpose and order must have had a designer. hume argues that it is at least possible that the universe is ordered and life-supporting as a result of chance and not intelligence.
account for the order in the universe without reference to god. there is a very high probability that a random system over a very long/infinite period of time will have a period of order and stability. this universe could currently be in that period of stability and appear to us as if it were designed.
