Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Arguments based on observation (teleological and cosmological)…
Arguments based on observation (teleological and cosmological)
Definitions
telos= purpose
Teleological is an argument that looks at things and thinks of how they have been designed
The teleological argument is a posterior- and looks at the result
regularity of succession- things follow certain laws for a certain outcome
Ockhams razor= the simplest answer is most often the correct one
The cosmological argument looks at the fact that the universe exists there must be a cause
Efficient causes follow in order, the cause in necessary
Infinate regression is a chain of events that go back forever
The fallacy of composition - just because it is true for each individual does not mean it is true for the whole
Contingent= relies on a necessary cause to exist
Teleological
Argument based on regularity ( design qua regularity)
St Thomas Aquinas set out his 5 ways to prove God existed
5th way
Everything in the natureal world aims towards its purpose because of God
Aquinas assumes everything has a purpose
Anthony Flew suggests that Aquinas' claim that things are directed is against the evidence
Natural laws ie gravity
Regularity of succession
Even when things cannot think for themswles thay follow natural laws like an arrow being aimed at a target
Some argue an arrow being shot at a target it ery unlike natural laws
Aristotle
Aquinas links the idea of the Final Cause to a Christian God not a Diety
While humans do think for themseles the reason they were made in the first place was the uncaused cause ie God
William Paley
you would assume an intelligent designer as all the parts work together ie universal laws
Arguments Based on purpose ( design qua purpose)
William Paley
If you found a watch you would assume
had a purpose
parts were designed for that purpose
parts put togther to achieve the purpose
the watch has a maker
watch is similar to the complexity of the eye
Paleys analogy suggetss that the natural world is mechanistic
David Hume
David Hume's critisism of the teleological argument - DID NOT CRITISISE PALEY AS HE WAS BEFORE
we cannot assume a builder like a house as the univers is not like a house and if ther house is faulty is it the designers fault
Paley dissmissed questions on the quality of the design
Swinburn
you can elaborate on the cause of an event ie a football comming through a window= something caused it and may be able to do more than kick footballs through windows
just because th universe is unique does not mean we cant use reason to deduce
analogys that are made are not very close to creation there is nothing in the universe to wich the unierserse can be compared
Matter migh naturally contain the spring of order as the mind does
do random changes tend to the orderly? ie darwinism
universe started out as random and natural changed from disorder to order
Epicurian hyothesis
Swinburn claims matter follows each other in a regualr way and we have more evidence of that over time
any effects we obsere in nature can be caused by a wide ariety of things
Why must there only be one designer ie a ship has many hands' Unity of the diety'
however Swinburns Ockhams Razor argues that explanaitions should not be more complex than they need to be
Hume claimed this didnt apply to the universe
Swinburn argues you always assume ine murderer
if there was more than one diety then you would see the difference in the work
John Stuart Mill
Questioned the goodness of nature given the cruelty found ie female digger wasp
amount of goodness in nature is outweighed by the suffering
Can the word curel be used in nature and what about the designer ?
Paley adnd aquinas were not concerned with the nature of the designer
Cosmological
Thomas Aquinas
first three ways are cosmological
First way: things are constantly in motion and therefore must have had a first mover
Argument for the unmoved mover
God did exist once doesnot mean he still exists
relies on contradiction , what caused God ?
Second Way nothing is the efficient cause of itself therefore there must have been a first cause
Argument for the uncaused cuse
Hume - we cannot assume everything has a cause
We cannot assume a relationship between cause and effect that is just in the human mind - if this is true the cosmological argument falls apart
the fallacy of composition bertrand russell - just because every man has a mother does not mean the whole of the human race has a mother
we cannot deduce the universe has a cause for existance because everything in the universe needs a cause for existance
Elizabth Anscombe?
Third way is the argument of contingency , there must be some being that is the necessary cause of itself , it contains in itself the caus eof existance
Aquinas' 5 ways
1- unmoved mover
2-uncaused cause
3-contingency
4-gradation
5-argument from teleogy
Aquinas considers continual causation
Copleston gave the two analogies writing on paper or winding a watch up - Aquinas' god is more of the second
Infinate regression is possible in real life ie a number line so why not in the creattion of the univer
who caused God
if contingent things all didnt exist at one time then nothing would exist therefore there must be a necessary being
however others argue that all contingent things could exist and not exist at different points in tiem