Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Arguments (Teleological argument (a-posteriori).…

- - - - Criticisms
        
        Not a good analogy 2. Even if it does work, it isn't the God of Judeo-Christianity 3. Guilty of anthropomorphism 4. The Universes order can come about by chance- Epicurean hypothesis.
        
        Response
        
        Use modern versions of the design argument 2. Fine tuning requires a God as an explanation 3. Use modern versions of the design argument- doesn't need a humanised person 4. Use fine tuning and irreversible complexity.
        
        An example of a criticism
        
        Watch vs Universe- More precise details happen independently. We can assume a watch was created but a watch isn't the universe plus we've never seen the Universe being created (can't assume like a watch).
- - - - Everything is explained by the 4 causes: Material, efficient, formal and final cause.
        
        However, we cannot go back indefinitely otherwise there would be no start, meaning nothing could be created.
      - 4 causes pen example: Material- Ink, plastic and metal. Efficient- Pen factory. Formal- The rollerball touches the paper and dispenses ink. Final- To write with.
- - - - Being conceivable in the mind and in reality is much greater than being conceived in the mind alone. It's greater to exist necessarily rather than contingently.
        
        Gaunilo's definition
        
        'Reductio ad absurdum' perfect island theory. If we conceive the greatest island it must, according to Anselm, exist. Any island that doesn't exist cannot be an island TTWNGCBC because it could be conceived to exist making it greater.
        
        Only God is TTWNGCBC so the perfect island exists contingently as only God can exist necessarily.
        
        Criticisms
        
        Existence is not a predicate because it doesn't depend on whether it exists or not. We need evidence to say 'there's something in the world that's like this (a-posteriori) so it cannot be deductive.
        
        A tautology doesn't tell us abut anything that exists. So a tautology won't tell us if there are actual examples of such things in existence.