Teleological arguments Flashcards

1
Q

What is a teleological argument?

A

Teleological arguments are arguments based on observation of order, complexity and beauty in the world which concludes that God exists. It is based on telos.

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

What are the two main teleological arguments?

A

The 2 main teleological arguments are:
Aquinas’s Fifth way
Paley’s design argument

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

What are the main points of Aquinas’s fifth way argument?

A

Aquinas gives us 5 ways we can conclude that God exists:

1) Everything has a final cause
2) Final causes requires an intelligence
3) Natural things are not given their final cause by human intelligence
4) Natural things must be given their final cause by non human intelligence
5) This conclude that… God exits (as non human intelligence and source of final causes)

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

Explain Aquinas’s example of the arrow

A

Aquinas provides an example of an arrow heading for a target(telos).

If we saw an arrow in the flight
we would conclude that it must have been shot on purpose
because arrows can’t move on their own
when we see the planets moving in an orderly way
we can conclude that a divine mind must have put them in motion on purpose
because planets can’t move on their own ..
Therefore, God exists.

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

What does Aquinas example of the arrow co

include?

A

This example shows that some non intelligible things (artificial things e.g. the arrow) cannot be explained by human intelligence there are many (natural things e.g. the weather) which cannot be explained by human intelligence.

Natural things are much ‘greater’ than artificial things (e.g. a fireplace vs a volcano), so the non human intelligence will be greater.

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

What are the main points of Paley’s teleological argument?

A

1) Anything that has parts organised to serve a purpose is designed.
2) Nature contains things with parts organised to serve a purpose e.g. eye.
3) Nature contains things which are designed
4) Design can only be explained by reference to the designer.
5) Designers must have intelligence and be distinct from the designed.
6) God exists (as the designer of nature and a transcendent mind)

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

Explain the watch maker analogy

A

Paley asked us to imagine that we find a watch in a field. A complex is explanation is needed to explain how the watch got there. As things work in a orderly and purposeful manner, we know that the watch must have been designed. Therefore there must be a watchmaker.

We can see this order and purpose in the world e.g. plants and animals- must have been designed by God.

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

Explain Paley’s example of the eye

A

Paley states that the eye is a natural machine-a simple explanation is insufficient, therefore a designer must be present.

The eye has many parts that serve different functions (e.g. cone cells give colour vision)that provide the overall purpose of vision.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Evaluation of Teleological argument

A
  • Weak analogy argued by Humes, the analogy between a watch and the entire universe is weak. Assuming that the universe is a artificial machine is begging the question.
  • Chance argued by Humes, the appearance of design is purely by chance.Provides an Epicurean hypothesis.

+ empirical evidence to support this argument as we can see the world around us and appreciate elements of beauty, order and purpose, this can only be explained by the existence of God.

  • Darwin’s theory of evolution through natural selection provides an alternative explanation for the creation of things.
  • Not everyone views this world as orderly and beautiful and purposive. Some view the world as chaotic e.g. poverty, tsunamis.
  • As an posteriori argument, it can only lead to a probable conclusion and does not prove anything.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly