RS (Telelogical argument)

Question 1

Paley uses the watch to say they have both.. so they must have a designer?

Answer 1

individual purpsoe _ total purpose

Question 2

He says the world also must ahve indicual purpose (e.g animals hunting) and we can asume?

Answer 2

the world also ahs total purpose becuae of the other similairities betweent he watch and the world
complexity

Question 3

Paley says cause must be.. to effect so?

Answer 3

proportional - the desinger oft hr world must eb much greate than that of thr watch

Question 4

Paley’s argument is?

Answer 4

a posterooir 9uses empirical evidanmce)
uses inductive reasoning to assume there is already a theisitic God
mechanisticn analogy
proble, of evil doesn’t mean an imperfect deigner
empriical evidance- draws conclusions of thr world like a watch

Question 5

Strengths of Paley’s Argument?

Answer 5

does fit in with a theistic, perfect God
does privde a logicla explanation and sues empirical data that everyone can use
more we disocer about compexity int he world the stronger the argument becomes
answer the problem of evil- just becuase world i faulty doesn’t mean an imperfect designer- result fo human freeewill

Question 6

Hume’s book of critisisims of the DESIGN ARGUMENT?

Answer 6

Dailogues concernign Natural Religion

Question 7

Hume’s characters?

Answer 7

Cleantes- a posterioir positin (like Paley)- argues design/order inthe world proves a great designer
Philos- argue agasint this
Demea (a prori- argues God obviously exists but we can’t understand him)

Question 8

Hume’s crticisms?

Answer 8

1) Anaglogy is invalid- mechanical thing and an organic thing don’e have ane essential similairty- but to sue a natural thing would reuslt in the ostensibly counter-evidentuail intution becuase we can’t observe a natural thing that shows specific act of design
2) Anaglogy would mean an anthropohmric God becuase if watch and the world are similar then GOd would be bound b some natural laws on earth which doesn’t fit with a thesitic God but if he doesn’t rhen the anaolgies aren’t similar
3) Multople creators- desing in the world could ahve multiple causes or creatr (liek a complex bilding project)
4) COuld this jsut eb a draft world?
5) Epicuran Hypothesis- demonstartes how the world could be ordered yet could appear due o random chance
6) Principle of Cuasility- we only have knowledge proportionate to the cuas eit produces- our experianc eis too limited to knwo the full potenitla of thw world
‘from the growthof a hari cna we learn anything about the generattioon fo a man?’
7) Creator is limited- either God lacks powe, knowledge or skill to stop evil so isn’t a perfect God
‘the world for all he knows is faulty compared to a superiour standard’
8) He sis manovelent- he doesn’t care, morally ambigous, , ‘nautre is red in tooth and claw’
9) Reductio ad aburdum- if you say wrld and watch are similar when they have no essnetial similairtty klike DNA you could say a dog and a flower are similair (basing it on empirical obseervation) which is ridiculous

Question 9

Voltair emphaises cleanthe sarguemnt by saying?

Answer 9

‘If a watch proves the exisatance of a watchmake rbut th world does not prove th eexistanc eof a great deisnger, I consent to eb called a fool’

Question 10

what is HUme mainly saying?

Answer 10

Philos’ the most rational posistion is to believe ina an unknownn igher power’
So he’s not denying the existanc eogf a gOd but that of a perfect God’ and say the analgoy s invalid

Question 11

Cleanthes doesn make sense in that?

Answer 11

‘we don’t need to justify universal truths’- we can assume from regualirty both the prld an dwatch ahve a designer

Question 12

Qua regulairty?

Answer 12

argues the order and regualiry in nature e.g ecosystems show evidanc eof a deasinger
jsut as a tidy gardne doesn’t come about by chance or thr order of solar systems there must be a designer (Cleanthes and Paley postiion)

Question 13

Qua Purpose?

Answer 13

argues that everything ahs a purpos (Paley)
allt he specific parts fit together/interact with each oher (like TV parts) to work
Scientific disoveries like Issac Newton laws og gravity- less need for God to explain the univerese- exlained planets
Pierre Laplace- argyes dvebtually everything would be discovered by science

Question 14

Aquinas Fifth way?

Answer 14

‘from the governenance of things’
argued fom qua regualirty and purpose
everything ahs a purpose but inanimate objects ahve no rational pursoe so have to be directed to their purpose by an Intellgioen Being
arguyed the way in which human bodeis ‘act in a antural fashion to achive their end’ shows evidance of a designer

Question 15

Darwin’s theory of evoltuion?

Answer 15

random mutations in nature>reuslt in some beeing better suited to envrionment>natural selection>survival of the fittest
why some organsim are so complext (food chains)
genstisist Steve jones ‘ world is a series of successful mistakes’

Question 16

Intelligen design (critic of evoltuion)

Answer 16

arues the need for a designer
some orgainsms like the bacteria flsggellum (Michale Berie)- shwo irreducible compexity- tpp complex to reuslt from random chance
accept some things do show adaptations bu not major plant and animal kingdoms>not into humans

Question 17

James Sadowiski says evoltuion could?

Answer 17

be created and sustained by God

Question 18

Dawkins was a strong advocate of?

Answer 18

evolution- used the ‘Blind Watchamker’ to refe to Paley’s analogy-
‘Evolution has no long-term goal’- it is a blind unconsous processn with ni purpose
‘Selfish gene’- our genes jsut use us as mechnism to pass on their successful genes so they survive
Humans have evoved to meet the conditions availble but we have o higher prupose
just used like a computer disk-‘ Its raining instrucitons out htere, its raingin prigrammes- this is not a metaphor its the plain truth’

Question 19

peter williams agrees that?

Answer 19

DNA is like a cimputer programme- genes do instruct use like a computer prigramme but sicne a programme comes form the mind of use, our DNA comes from the mind of God

Question 20

FR Tennant and his critisisism

Answer 20

Anthopic principle:
Rationailty- world can be aanalysed in a a rational manner- not chaotic-assume that there is a designer- logical
critisim: others ahve come to logical conclsions that God doesn’t exists due to problem of evil, other reasons for order e.g. evolution
Unlikely- small chance of the Big Bang occuring- and us resulting from it- world can’t rely on a sereis of coincides- if there had been a minute change to charge of an electron- world probably woulldn’t exists
ciristism: Dawkins, it was chance
Man- aesthetic argument0 we ca appreciate bauty in naure, morality, self-awareness- hsows a divine creator
criitsim: os this selfish? agretaer purpsoe?

Question 21

MIll

Answer 21

‘Nature and Utility of Religion
‘Eiter there is an incompetant or an immorla God’
No intelligen design- the ‘atrocites humans and aninmal committ in nature would not go unpnished if they were the result of human agencey (God)’
Men are imprisoned or hanged for thigns that are a part of naurre’s everyday peformance

Question 22

Mill’s Strenths?

Answer 22

uses empirical observations>most would come to loical conclusion- the prblem of evil
God alcks the power or is morally ambigious
mathmetical regularity and order in nature to strenghten his argument

Question 23

Mill’s critisisism?

Answer 23

Possible answers to problem of evil e.g. the Epircurean hyptheesis
moves from a designer to a god- his argument oesn’t really disprove a desinger just an immora God 9simialir to Hume)
Problem with emprical observation- could be a greater purpose for evil