teleological arguments Flashcards
what are the ppc’s for Hume’s argument?
p1) in the organisation for parts for a purpose, nature resembles the products of design
p2) similar effects have similar causes
p3) the cause of products is an intelligent mind that intended the design
p4) the intelligent mind must be distinct from the designed
c1) the designer of the universe must be an intelligent mind who a) intended the design and b) is distinct from the designed
c2) the intelligent designer exists
c3) the intelligent designer is god
what is aquinas’ argument?
p1) things that lack intelligence such as living organisms have an end
p2) things that lack intelligence cannot move towards their end unless they are directed by someone with knowledge and intelligence
p3) an arrow does not direct itself towards it’s target but needs an archer
c) therefore, there must be something intelligent that directs non-intelligent beings to their end
c2) this being is god
what does paley’s argument use as an example?
Paley uses a watch and stone found in a heath
what is the criticism against Paley’s argument that it arises out of a possible combination?
`
the possibility that the watch arised out of a purely random process - epicurean hypothesis
- paley rejects this
what is the watchmaker criticism of Paley’s argument?
there is a possibility that the watch did not have a watchmaker, but a watchmaking machine which can make other watches with all the features
- this gives rise to the fact that the watchmaking machine was made ny a watchmaking machine and so on
despite this, what then were the watchmaking machines made by - Paley says god
what is Paley’s argument?
p1) anything that has parts organised for a purpose is designed
p2) nature contains things which have parts that are organised to serve a purpose
c1) therefore, nature contains things which are designed
p3) design can only be explained in terms of a designer
p4) a designer a) be or have a mind and b) be distinct from what is designed
c2) therefore, nature was designed by a mind that is distinct from nature
c3) therefore, such a mind exists
what is swinburne’s argument?
p1) the universe as a whole contains temporal order/regularities of succession
p2) there are two possible explanatory hypotheses 1) temporal order has a scientific explanation or 2) temporal order has a personal explanation
p3) 1) fails as science can only explain the existence of regularities of succession in terms of more fundamental regularities of succession
p4) 2) can explain scientific regularities of succession as they are similar to regularities of succession produced by human agents
p5) the agency in question would have to be of immense power and intelligence, free and disembodies
c1) therefore, an agent probably exists, with immense power and intelligence who is free and disembodied
what is swinburne’s distinction between the types of order?
swinburne distinguishes between spatial and temporal order
spatial order - the arrangement of objects in space
temporal order - the pattern of the way objects behave in time
what are the other conclusions we could make with the analogy?
- we cannot infer an infinite cause because the universe is finite
- the existence of spatial disorder would support an inference to a cause that was not omnipotent/scient
- designers are not always creators - architects and they work with pre-existing materials
what is hume’s objection to paley’s analogy
the analogy made is weak - the universe is more like a vegetable than a watch
- if order in the universe is explained by order in the ideas of a mind that order itself needs explaining - a regress of universes of ideas threatens the supposed simplicity of invoking god as an explanation
what is hume’s objection to spatial disorder
the universe contains spatial disorder - parts that serve no purpose or serve the purpose ineffectively
- the design argument is meant to explain the universe as a whole so it is not clear why spatial order is prioritized over spatial disorder
what is hume’s objection from a unique case?
our inferences from effects to causes are based on repeated observations between two events but in the case of the universe we have only experienced one and even then did not experience the creation of it and so vannot make any inference to a purposeful cause.
- we cannot tell from one instance of an event what the cause is,
- constant conjunction
what is constant conjunction?
what we mean and experience as cause and effect. the feeling of one event inevitably following the the other is the result of repetition
what is it that god is the best explanation?
in order to infer that there is a designer of nature, we have to rule out other possible explanations of the organisation of parts for a purpose, and the other explanations are worse:
- assume that matter is finite and time is inifinite = all combinations of matter would occur
- theory of evolution by natural selection = ockham’s razor
- existence of the universe is a fact that requires no further explanation
