Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Philosophy > U1T1 The Teleological Argument > Flashcards

U1T1 The Teleological Argument Flashcards

1
Q

Aquinas’ Inductive Argument / Fifth Way

A
  • observe beneficial order in the universe
  • this could not happen by chance ‘not fortuitously, but designedly’
  • objects do not have the intelligence to work towards a purpose or end
  • ‘some intelligent being exists by whom all natural things are directed to their end’
  • ‘and this being we call God’
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

The Inductive Leap

A

the seemingly large stretch between Aquinas stating the need for an intelligent designer, and then identifying this designer as God

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

Design Qua Regularity

A

the order and consistency observable in the universe (eg Newtonian physics) is evidence of a designer

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

Design Qua Purpose

A

the universe and everything in it seem to fulfil a purpose - this is evidence of a designer

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

Summa Theologica

A

text in which Aquinas outlines his ‘Five Ways’ aiming to show faith can be founded in reason

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

The ‘prime mover’

A

Aristotle’s idea that whatever caused the universe to enter a state of motion is in a state of unchanging actuality. Used as the foundation of Aquinas’ Inductive Argument

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

Paley’s Analogical Argument overview

A
  • if you see a rock on a heath, you would likely assume it has always been there in that state due to its simplicity
  • if you were to see a watch, even if you had never come across one before, you would assume it had an intelligent maker due to its complexity
  • the universe too is intricate and complex, so implies an intelligent designer
  • ‘the marks of design are too strong. design must have a designer. that designer is God.’
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Paley’s criteria for a complex item

A
  • specific materials
  • several parts
  • works to a purpose or end
  • regular motion
  • indispensable parts
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

the crux of Paley’s Analogical Argument

A

‘like effects have like causes’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

the type of argument Paley’s Analogical Argument is

A

inductive; a posteriori; argument by analogy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

argument by analogy

A

inductive argument which likens familiar situation to less similar situation and suggests that to maintain consistency, the same conclusions must be drawn about them

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

telos

A

Greek term meaning purpose/aim/end

According to Aristotle: the ‘final cause’ required for something to exist, and the goal it naturally tends towards

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

teleology

A

account of a given thing’s purpose as an explanation of the cause of the thing

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

inductive reasoning / arguments

A

cannot prove, but try to persuade by providing evidence from human experience in support of the conclusion

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

a posteriori

A

knowledge gained by logical deductions made from observation and experience of the material world

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Natural Theology

A

the text in which Paley gives his analogical argument as a Christian apologist in attempts to prove faith can be grounded in reason

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

strengths of inductive thinking

A
  • relies on experience that may be universal or at least testable
  • relies on accepting the nature of evidence
  • demands overwhelmingly good reasons for accepting the conclusion is the most likely
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

weaknesses of inductive thinking

A
  • alternative conclusions may be just as convincing
  • can only say if certain phenomena are the case we may be able to make certain claims about them
  • often more than one possible conclusion
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

general weaknesses of Paley’s analogical argument

A
  • appears to be assuming order in the universe simply because there is order in a watch
  • unclear if the watch is analogous to the world or whole universe
  • is the world not too different to the watch to withstand comparison
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

revealed theology

A

we can see god exists and gives order to the world through revelations given from god to humans

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Paley’s response to evidence of bad design

A

watches often go wrong, this does not mean they were not designed. it may simply be we do not understand the full workings of the world and less competent then the designer

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Cleanthes

A

character in Hume’s ‘Dialogues’ who using natural theology argues from the world to God, stating there are parallels between design present in the world, and design of the world, and like effects have like causes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Demea

A

Character in Hume’s ‘Dialogues’ who comes from a position of faith

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Philo

A

character in Hume’s ‘Dialogues’ who acts as a spokesperson for Hume’s own views. Comments on how the universe may well have come about through chance, and that even if there are the grounds to assume the universe was designed, there are not the grounds to make claims about the character or nature of the designer

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

Paley’s analogical argument assumptions

3

A
  • assumes analogy is appropriate
  • assumes effects are predictable
  • assumes existence of god from evidence of design
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

the effectiveness of analogy

A

can only say with certainty the conclusion of the observed situation. any slight change from the original situation may yield different conclusions. the more the conditions change, the lesser the confidence in induction

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

Hume’s limitation of the design argument

A

the argument may be able to ‘assert the universe arose sometime, from something like design: but beyond that position he cannot ascertain one single circumstances’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

Hume on the nature of a universal designer

A

cannot confidently make any claims - for all we know we could be ‘the first rude essay of some infant deity’, or many deities cooperating together

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

Paley’s view on goodness of the designer

A

would only be unjustified in attributing goodness to the designer if the world were an unbearable place, and ‘it is a happy world after all’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

Paley’s view on the amounts of suffering vs goodness

A

‘happiness is the rule; misery is the exception’ eg we are shocked when we hear a friend is ill, but are not when we hear they are experiencing happiness

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

Schopenhauer’s view on misery vs happiness

A

misery outweighs happiness. ‘compare the respective feelings of two animals, one of which is engaged in eating the other’ ‘we generally find pleasure not so pleasant as we expected, and pain very much more painful’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

Paley v Hume view of nature

A

sees the design and creation of a benevolent God vs sees ‘nothing but the idea of a blind nature’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

Paley: attributing omnipotence to a designer

A

perfectly reasonable - a being capable of creating this universe much have power infinitely beyond power we have experience of, and infinite power equates to omnipotence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
34
Q

Ockham’s Razor

A

the principle that the simplest hypothesis is generally preferable

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

infinite regress

A

Hume’s argument that if human-like intelligence appears designed and humans have a designer, then so must the designer of humans and so forth

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
36
Q

analogical argument premises

A

1 - there exists an object in nature (n) resembling a manmade artifact (m) in a significant way (R)
2 - m has R because it was created deliberately by human design
3 - similar effects have similar causes
conclusion: probable that n has R because was designed by something with human-like intelligence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
37
Q

Hume objection to analogical argument premise 1

that nature resembles a man made artifact

A

universe more similar to a living thing than an artifact. nature is alive and self sustaining, an artifact is not

38
Q

Hume objection to analogical argument premise 3

the universe appears to be, and therefore is, designed

A

there are other ways to explain away design. the universe may be a product of chance - if matter is eternal then there may be enough possible worlds that all possibilities are realised

39
Q

3 dangers of anthropomorphism

A
  • removes divine distinctiveness
  • emphasises limitedness, changeability, fallibility
  • implies god is then non-moral, limited, fallible
40
Q

Swinburne: regularities of co-presence

A

spatial order - the observable tendency for things to be arranged in ordered ways eg a town with roads all at right angles to each other

41
Q

Swinburne: regularities of succession

A

temporal order - simple patterns of behaviour of objects over a time period - eg behaviour in accordance to Newton’s laws

42
Q

18th century spatial argument

A

animals are similar to machines made by rational agents. it therefore seems probable that the first animals were made by a rational agent since couldnt have come to be via generation

43
Q

adaptations to spatial argument since theory of evolution

A

since evolution is only able to occur due to presence of specific laws within nature, nature itself can be compared to a machine which makes machines. rational agent -> machine-making machine (nature) -> machine

44
Q

Swinburne: ineffectiveness of spatial argument

A

analogy between nature and ‘machine-making machine’ is weak - nature only behaves in this way under rare circumstances. can be argued we only see order in the universe since we try to impose it and coincidence has thus far allowed it

45
Q

Swinburne: temporal argument

A
  • temporal order continues despite varying initial conditions and interference from humans, therefore is independent of man and a genuine part of the nature of the universe
46
Q

meaning of Swinburne’s card-shuffling analogy

A

of course we see order in need of explanation since without that order we probably wouldnt exist. however this doesnt mean the order is not extraordinary or not in need of explanation: the presence of order is not remarkable because we perceive it, but simply because of its objective existence at all

47
Q

the anthropic principle

A

moderns design argument that accepts scientific theories including the big bang and evolution. focuses on the idea that chance alone is exceedingly unlikely to have produced conditions required of the universe for evolution of human life

48
Q

Swinburne: what the success of science reveals

and what this provides

A

argues that the success of science in showing us how deeply ordered the natural world is provides strong grounds for believing there is a deeper cause for that order

49
Q

the strong anthropic principle

+ common arguments / evidence used

A

claims the entire universe was designed to produce human life. arguments often include physics / astronomy eg the goldilocks zone, ozone, gas giants

50
Q

tennant: the strong anthropic principle

A

states as we identify all the physics that has worked together for our benefit ‘it seems as if the universe must in some sense have known we were coming’

51
Q

strong anthropic principle criticism: anthropocentric attitudes

with reference to cause and effect

A
  • assumes the laws of the universe are as they are because of human existence when surely it is actually that we are as we are since we evolved within the conditions of the universe - confuses cause and effect to favour humans
52
Q

strong anthropic principle criticism: Adams’ intelligent puddle analogy

A

compares believing the inverse was made for humans to an intelligent puddle considering how perfectly it fits the hole it is in and hence incorrectly concluding the hole must have been made for the purpose of the puddle filling it

53
Q

strong anthropic principle criticism: chaos not order

A

science suggest entire universe not determined by conditions at Big Bang since too many random / chaotic factors at work

54
Q

the aesthetic principle

A

beauty is present and we perceive it. there is no reason for the universe to be beautiful and no evolutionary need for humans to be capable of appreciating it. this suggests a designer who arranged for universe to not only be habitable but beautiful

55
Q

Augustine of Hippo: the aesthetic principle

A

‘who made these beautiful changeable things, if not one who is beautiful and unchangeable’

56
Q

criticisms of aesthetic principle: cause and effect

A

confuses causes with effects - we probably find universe beautiful because it is what we evolved around. if it looked different we would find that beautiful instead

57
Q

criticisms of anthropic principle: Richard Dawkins

A

Beethoven and Shakespeare’s works are sublime, and would be with or without the presence of God. They do not prove the existence of God, they prove the existence of Beethoven and Shakespeare

58
Q

the weak anthropic principle

A

accepts creatures like us may have evolved on other planets. holds the universe is set up to form planets, some of which will support life. once life appears, evolution will ensure some of it becomes intelligent and self aware

59
Q

Argument from Fine-Tuning

A

surprising the universe is biophilic due to the amount of factors which if slightly different would not support life. the universe is like a radio that must be tuned to a specific frequency to ‘pick up’ life

60
Q

fine tuning argument: Leslie’s firing-squad analogy

A
  • you are to be executed by a firing squad of 100
  • you hear the sound of guns, then silence, they missed
  • if they had not missed, you would not be able to reflect on the failed execution
  • you are right to be amazed they all missed
61
Q

argument against designer: minimally biophilic universe

A

most of the universe is inhospitable. surely designer would create an optimally biophilic universe

62
Q

Bertrand Russel: against the fine tuning argument

A

universe is ‘brute fact’ we should accept it how it is without looking for reasons

63
Q

Dawkins’ criticism of Paley’s argument

A

evolution has no long term goal. the criteria for natural selection is based on short term reproductive benefit

64
Q

Dawkins’ ‘The Selfish Gene’

A

‘we are survival machines - robot vehicles blindly programmed to preserve the selfish molecules known as genes’

65
Q

Dawkins’ on DNA

A

compares DNA to seeds in the air, literally spreading instructions for making themselves. ‘It is raining DNA outside … it’s raining programmes’

66
Q

Peter Williams on limits of Darwinian evolution

A

while evidence strongly supports Darwinism from the starting point of simple molecular biochemical machines, it has not proposed a route for these systems to form in the first place

67
Q

problem with Fine Tuning Argument: improbability does not mean impossibility

A
  • assumption that there must be a designer due to the improbability of the universe occurring by chance is entirely intuitive and hence unsound
68
Q

George Schlesinger’s Argument From Suspicious Improbabilities

A
  • if John wins an improbable lottery game, you would not assume that he, or someone on his behalf, cheated
  • if John won the lottery game 3 consecutive times you would immediately be tempted to assume cheating as this event is ‘of a kind that is surprising in a way that warrants interference of design’
  • that the universe is fine tunes for life is improbable in the same way John winning the lottery multiple times is
  • if we are justified in inferring intelligent design in John’s lottery winnings, we are even more so in the case of the universe
69
Q

weakness of argument from suspicious improbabilities: empirical background facts

A

in the case of John and the lottery:
- already know intelligent agents with capacity to manipulate results exist
- know from past event such situations are usually explained by deliberate agency of such agents

in case of the universe we do not know these

70
Q

weakness of argument from suspicious improbabilities: lack of knowledge of the universe

A
  • cannot prove life would not have arisen in different universe conditions
  • physics speculates we are one universe in a ‘multiverse’ where all possible material universes are eventually realised (if this is the case, at least one had to have life, so does not warrant design that it is this one)
71
Q

Hume and Mill: dysteleological argument

A

absence of order, and presence of poor design
- appendix is pointless and can be fatal
- genetic disorders
- wings on flightless birds

72
Q

Mill: the problem of evil - the nature of cosmic forces

A

‘they go straight to their end, without regarding what or whom they crush’

73
Q

Mill: wills of a world maker

A

if the maker of the world can do all that he will, he wills misery and there is no escaping that conclusion

74
Q

Darwin: problem of evil - the nature of God

A

i cannot persuade myself that a beneficient and omnipotent God would have designedly created the Ichneumonidae or that a cat should play with mice

75
Q

Michael Behe: intelligent design within biology

A

observing cells is ‘like going into an automobile factory’. in biology many terms implicit of design eg ‘molecular machines’ are used, and all biologists acknowledge appearance of design

76
Q

Michael Behe: bacterial flagellum

A

has the structure of rotary motor - too elegant and intricate to not have required design

76
Q

Michael Behe: Darwinism outdated

A

was more probable when it was proposed, before the realisation we are dealing with complex molecular machines

77
Q

Krauss: against intelligent design

A

no evidence, no studies, experiments, research to support it, so irrelevant from scientific perspective. appearance of design is subjective

78
Q

Michael Behe: irreducible complexity - the flagellum

A

evolution claims things become more complex in stages, but the flagellum could not have had a simpler stage - with any part missing it would not function. ‘any precursor that is missing a part is by definition non-functional’

79
Q

DeGrasse Tyson: stupid design

A

if the universe was designed for us (which it was not), the design is stupid due to the hostility life faces

80
Q

DeGrasse Tyson: examples of stupid design on universal scale (3)

A
  • most places kill life instantly due to extreme temperatures and radiation
  • Milky Way galaxy will collide with Andromeda
  • ‘one way universe will wind down to oblivion’
81
Q

DeGrasse Tyson: examples of stupid design on Earth (3)

A
  • cannot live on 2/3 of the surface
  • 99% of all life that ever existed is extinct
  • located in a ‘shooting range’ of comets and asteroids
82
Q

DeGrasse Tyson: examples of stupid design within humans (3)

A
  • genetic / birth defects
  • lose bodily functions as we age
  • breathe and eat through the same hole
83
Q

Ken Miller criticism of Behe intelligent design: the flagellum

A

arguably would actually have a function if it was simpler - the same proteins serve varying functions in different arrangements

84
Q

Miller opposition to Behe intelligent design: pseudo-science

A

incompatible with scientific method and blurs lines between legitimate and unfounded knowledge - eg it relies on the inductive leap

85
Q

Robin Collins’ Confirmatory Argument

A

version of the argument from fine tuning claiming the observation of fine-tuned properties provides reason to prefer the Design Hypothesis

86
Q

Collins’ Prime Principle of Confirmation

A

If observation O is more probably under hypothesis H than H2, then O provides evidence for preferring H over H2

87
Q

Confirmatory Argument: probabilities of fine-tuned properties

A

assuming the Design Hypothesis to be true: approaches 1
assuming Atheistic Single-Universe Hypothesis: probability very small

88
Q

Confirmatory Argument criticism from Himma: insufficiency alone

A

relies on an inference strategy that presupposes we have independent evidence for thinking the right kind of intelligence agency exists - not convincing without this

89
Q

Confirmatory Argument criticism from Himma: John winning the lottery

A

Theistic Hypothesis that God wanted John to win the lottery & intervened grants much higher probability of John winning than Chance Hypothesis. Confirmatory Argument would therefore prefer John’s lottery winning to be result of divine intervention

Philosophy (2 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions