Theme 1- Arguments for the existence of God

Question 1

inductive proof definition

Answer 1

argument constructed on evidence and/or experience that puts forward a possible conclusion based on these

Question 2

Posit definition

Answer 2

to put forward, or state, a fact or belief, usually as the basis for an argument or conclusion

Question 3

inductive arguments- teleological

Answer 3

1)ST Thomas Aquinas’ 5th way
2)William Paley’s watchmaker analogy
3)F.R Tennant’s anthropic and aesthetic arguments

Question 4

Inductive arguments- cosmological

Answer 4

1) St thomas aquinas’ first 3 ways
2) The Kalam cosmological argument

Question 5

A posteriori defenition

Answer 5

a statement that is based on actual observation, evidence, experimental data or experience- relates to inductive reasoning

Question 6

empirically definition

Answer 6

using knowledge gained through the experiences of any of the 5 senses

Question 7

St Thomas Aquinas’ first 3 ways

Answer 7

1) motion
2) causation
3) contingency

Question 8

St Thomas Aquinas’ 5th way- arrow and archer analogy

Answer 8

something that lacks intelligence cannot move towards fulfilling a useful end unless something with intelligence has moved it.
An arrow itself cannot reach the target. it needs to be fired by the archer for this to happen. he relates this to the working of the universe- everything follows natural laws even though they posses no intelligence eg regular movement of stars. this suggests they have been directed by something else (God), as they dont have the ability to ‘think’ for themselves.

Question 9

William Paley’s watchmaker analogy

Answer 9

the complexity of the world suggests there is a purpose to it. This suggests there must be a designer, which he said is God.Paley used a watch to illustrate his point. If he came across a mechanical watch on the ground, he would assume that its many complex parts fitted together for a purpose and that it had not come into existence by chance. There must be a watchmaker.

Question 10

Tennant’s anthropic and aesthetic arguments

Answer 10

anthropic principle- the universe is adapted for life. this seems to improbable to have come about by chance, it is more likely it is the result of some ultimate intelligence (g0d). he couples this with the observation that life seems to be progressing towards some kind of intended aim ‘the realisation of the good’- humans have evolved to become moral creatures
Aesthetic argument- the world is infused with beauty, which is Unnecessary for survival. he suggests humans are able to appreciate beauty as a result of design and is to encourage human minds to discover god.

Question 11

Aquinas 1st way-motion

Answer 11

In the world some things are in motion, which are put in motion by another and so on. However, this cannot go on to infinity, as there would be no first mover, and therefore no other mover. therefore there must be a first mover who was put in motion by no other (God)

Question 12

Aquinas 2nd way- causation

Answer 12

if in efficient causes it is possible to go on to infinity, there will be no first cause, nor ultimate effect, nor intermediate causes, so there must be a first efficient cause which is God

Question 13

Aquinas 3rd way- contingency

Answer 13

everything that exists has the possibility of not existing. if this were true of everything in existence then nothing would have come into existence. for contingent beings to exists there must be a non-contigent being who brought them into existence, which is God

Question 14

Hume’s challenges to the cosmological argument

Answer 14

1) we have no experience of things that don’t have a cause, our experience of the universe is limited
2) if we are to assume god is eternal because of some quality, why cant we assume the universe has the same quality
3) just because we know things in the universe have a cause, this doesnt mean there is a cause of the universe as a whole ( fallacy of composition)
4) nothing is demonstrable unless the contrary is a contradiction. there is no being whose non-existence implies a contradiction, so there is no being whose contradiction is demonstrable

Question 15

possible responses to humes challenge

Answer 15

1) even if something is conceivable in a logical sense, it does not follow that it is factually possible
2) Aquinas is not thinking about a first mover/cause, but a sustaining cause that is metaphysically prior
3) since everything in the universe is contingent, and the universe is the totality of everything that exists, then the universe as a whole must be contingent
4) Aquinas argues that the nature of contingent things is such that they require a necessary being to explain their existence- factual necessity. he rejects the idea that we should consider god a logically necessary being for the same reasons as hume- we are not led to a contradiction of we say ‘ god does not exist’

Question 16

Hume’s challenges to the teleological argument

Answer 16

1) we have no experience of universes being made and have no non-designed universes to compare it with
2) if we accept the world is similar to a man-made object, we must look for similar causes: designer not infinite/perfect, anthropomorphic, multiple designers
3) Epicurean hypothesis- given an infinite amount of time an ordered system could arise due to chance

Question 17

responses to Hume’s challenges teleological

Answer 17

1) Paley claims it is not necessary to have experienced intelligent designers producing objects to know they were designed. there are certain features that would lead us to conclude something has been designed
2) paley points out the universe is more vast and complex than a human object, so the cause would be as well. one god would be the ‘simplest explanation’
3) order and complexity is extremely unlikely and becomes increasingly improbable the more evidence we find of order in the world.

Question 18

Theory of evolution challenge to the teleological argument

Answer 18

1)natural selection and evolution explain the complexities of species in terms of natural and random processes, rather than being the work of God-
2) nature is not harminous and ordered all the time . ‘red in tooth and claw’ , eg natural disasters
3) Dawkins refers to evolution as the ‘blind watchmaker’ - it does not see ahead or have a future purpose in mind

Question 19

responses to challenges by evolution

Answer 19

The design argument is not incompatible with evolution , it could be driven by god