Teleological arguments (Religion) Flashcards
What are teleological arguments?
Arguments that argue the universe shows signs of intelligent design thus a creator/designer that were made for an end goal or purpose, the designer being God.
What does Aquinas’ 5th way argue?
Natural objects move towards a certain goal or purpose. Aquinas notes objects don’t behave randomly but with regularity. P1: The behaviour of objects is goal-directed towards an end, because they follow natural laws.
P2: Natural laws cannot have been created by objects themselves, since they are non-intelligent or insufficiently intelligent.
C1: Natural laws must have an intelligent designer. ‘That thing we call God.’
What is Paley’s Design Qua Purpose argument?
P1)Anything that has many parts working together to serve a purpose is designed
P2)Nature has intricate parts working together to serve a purpose
P3)So, nature has design
P4)Any design has a designer
P5)This designer must be distinct from what it’s designing, distinct from nature in this case
C)Therefore, the designer of nature (or the universe) must be God.
Paley uses the analogy of the watch. The complexity of the watch shows intricate design, therefore there has to be a watchmaker. He also uses the human eye.
What is Paley’s Design Qua regularity argument?
P1)All of the universe and life has structure
P2)Things like cells work together to serve their purpose, tissue and organs work together to serve their purpose.
P3)We find order or regularity in nature
P4)Due to this harmonious coordination and relationship we find between all parts of living things, there has to be design.
P5)We can infer from design that there is a designer
P6)Any designer is distinct from what it designs
C)Therefore God must be the universe’s designer.
Paley uses the watch again, every part of the watch is so specifically made that one thing being slightly off would stop the whole system driving towards the end goal. Just like gravity, if it was slightly off the whole universe would be different.
What are criticisms of Paley using analogies?
Unsound analogy-
Hume argues analogies can’t be used as proof. They aren’t aposteriori arguments. It’s very difficult to use the watch as an example against the universe because they are so unalike.
The world is composed of organic and mineral matter, nothing like a machine, what a watch is.
Man-made Analogy-
The watch being man-made shows clear design and thus designer o=so it would naturally lead to the conclusion of the designed universe, begging the question. It further suggests the creator of the universe is a human-like God.
-One single analogy isn’t enough to show the cause of something.
What are counter criticism arguments for Paley’s arguments from analogy?
Paley’s argument is not an analogy between the universe and artefacts. He has given aposteriori evidence and through inference we say the universe has design based on information we are given.
What is the argument from uniqueness?
Criticises Paley’s analogy from the watch.
The most reliable foundations for belief are based on multiple accounts of observation and experiences.
Hume argues that “like causes have like effects”. We need a large database of experience to recognise alike causes and effect and ones not alike. Hume says we don’t have enough experience of the universe to determine the cause of it. The universe is so unlike anything else in our experience it’s very hard to make inferences.
A million watches VS one earth
What is the standard form for the argument for uniqueness?
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 one, and its properties are a unique case.
P4)We have never observed the origins of any universe
C1)We cannot make any inference about the cause of this universe and its properties
C2)Design arguments are based on invalid inference
What is the issue of spatial order? How does Paley respond?
Criticises design arguments.
Design arguments ignore bad/evil designs of “vice, misery and disorder”. Aposteriori observations of the world cannot provide a basis to conclude a perfect God. If God really designed the universe and has his perfect qualities, such disorder wouldn’t exist.
If something is designed then everything should be in the right place, our bodies should be perfect, so we shouldn’t have disease.
Paley’s response: He doesn’t think it’s fatal to the design argument. Whether or not the watch works is irrelevant- what is important is that the watch has qualities that indicates design. The same goes for the universe- spatial order does not matter if there is evidence for an arrangement of parts functioning together for a purpose.
What is Hume’s constant conjunction objection?
We never observe causation directly. When we see that a billiard ball hits another one causing it to move we only see the two events occur next to each other. As an empiricist Hume says we can never have knowledge about causation if all knowledge is from sense experience.
Inferring the existence of a thing from the existence of another thing through induction requires experience of their constant conjunction.
To infer the existence of a designer from a thing, we need either:
Experience of that thing being made conjoined with its designer, experience of similar things being made and their designer.
Inferring a house has a designer requires empirical experience of a designer making a house.
What is the epicurean hypothesis?
Criticises the design argument. Epicures was an ancient Greek philosopher who thought the universe infinitely existed and was composed of atoms. If epicures was correct a random universe given an infinite amount of time will assemble itself into an orderly one over time. Atoms will collide in such a way orderly arrangement will come about. On an infinite time scale it’s guaranteed to happen. We are in the right place at the right time, all chance and coincidence.
What are Kant’s criticism against teleological arguments?
Focuses on the conclusions.
1) The conclusion doesn’t prove God’s existence. Architects, builders and watchmakers have designed their artifact however they didn’t create the material, they manipulated it. This analogy then means that the creator of the universe did not make the materials but used what was already there. This image does not reflect the God that a lot of people know. This argument concludes there is a ‘worldly architect’.
2)Design arguments aim to prove that an all perfect God created the universe. However, the design arguments never once reference the creator possessing any omniqualities. We imagine the qualities of a human watchmaker and maximise them to make them more substantial. There is no supreme goodness. Kant argues you cannot move from evidence in the world to the conclusion that God is perfect.
What is Swinburne’s teleological argument?
