Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
W6 - B2 - CHAPTER 2 THE CLASSIC ARGUMENT FROM DESIGN Tomothy Chappell -…
W6 - B2 - CHAPTER 2
THE CLASSIC ARGUMENT FROM DESIGN
Tomothy Chappell
2.2- CLEANTHES'S
VERSION
CLEANTHE'S
ARGUMENT, p.54
MAIN CONCLUSION
SO WORLD CREATED BY
INTELLIGENT DESIGNER = GOD
PREMISE 1
NATURAL WORLD = HIGHLY ORGANISED SYSTEM,
SUITED TO BRING PARTICULAR OUTCOMES
PREMISE 2
SOME HUMANLY CREATED OBJECTS =
HIGHLY COMPLEX SYSTEMS, SUITED TO
BRING PARTICULAR OUTCOMES
SUBCONCLUSION 1
SO NATURAL WORLD RESEMBLE
SOME HUMANLY CREATED OBJECTS
PREMISE 3
WHERE 2 THINGS RESEMBLE E/O,
SO DO THEIR CAUSES
SUBCONCLUSION 2
SO CAUSE OF NATURAL WORLD
RESEMBLE CAUSE OF THESE HUMANLY
CREATED OBJECTS
PREMISE 4
HUMANLY CREATED OBJECTS = CAUSED TO EXIST
BY INTELLIGENT DESIGNERS (HUMANS)
EVALUATION
of inferences validity
PREMISES 1 & 2 =
ENOUGH TO GUARANTEE
TRUTH OF SUB 1; SO INFERENCE IS VALID, p.56
SUB 1 & PREMISE 3
= YES, ALSO VALID
EVALUATION
PREMISE 1
(a) NATURAL WORLD =
HIGHLY ORGANISED SYSTEM
PART OF THE WORLD
SEEMS ORGANISED (ants...), p.59
PART OF THE WORLD SEEMS
CHAOTIC AND RANDOM (volcano...), p.59
(b) ACCURATELY SUITED TO
BRINGING PARTICULAR OUTCOMES
PART OF THE WORLD
SEEMS YES (echolocation...), p.60
BUT SOME PARTS
SEEMS BAD DESIGN
(dangerous creatures, viruses...), p.60
JUST BECAUSE PART OF THE
WORLD SUITED TO ENDS, DOESN'T MEAN
WHOLE SINGLE WORLD TO SINGLE END, p.61
PREMISE 2
CLEARLY TRUE, p.62
SUBC 1
ALSO TRUE, p.62
PREMISE 3
YES, WHEN THINGS REALLY
RESEMBLE E/O. IF THEY ARE JUST
'A BIT' SIMILAR, CAN WE STILL INFER
SAME CAUSE? p.63
YES, WHEN WE SEE A LOT OF
SIMILAR EXAMPLES; wHEN WE DON'T, CAN
WE INFER SIMILAR CAUSES? (we only know one world), p.63
MAIN CONCLUSION
EVEN IF IT IS DESIGNED,
WHY WOULD IT BE GOD?, p.64
EVALUATION
IF CONCLU ONLY ABT
A DESIGNER, VALID; BUT NOT
SO SOUND AS P3 WEAK
SUBC 2
VALID, BUT WEAK ANALOGY, p.64
PREMISE 4
TRUE, p.64
2.3- PALEY'S ARGUMENT
p.71
PALEY'S ARGUMENT
PREMISE
WATCH ORGA SO PRECISE
= MORE LIKELY TO BE DESIGNED
THAN ACCIDENT
SUBCONCLUSION
SO ALL NATURE'S FEATURES
DEMONHSTRATING PRECISE
ORGANISATION LIKE THIS
= EACH OF THEM MORE LIKELY
DESIGNED THAN ACCIDENT
MAIN CONCLUSION
SO NATURE MUST HAVE
A DESIGNER = GOD
OBJECTIONS
ASSUMPTION THAT
DESIGNER = GOD
NTHG IN PALEY'S ARGUMENT
SHOWS ONLY ONE GOD OR
THAT IT HAS FEATURES OF
TRADITIONAL GOD, p.72
THEORY OF
EVOLUTION, p.73-74
BLIND LAWS OF PHYSICS
THOSE WHO DO NOT
ADAPT DO NOT SURVIVE
DIRECTED EVOLUTION, p.75
GOD DIRECTING /
GUIDING EVOLUTION
WEAKER VERSION
EVOLUTION
HAPPENED BECAUSE GOD
MADE IT HAPPEN
STRONGER VERSION
INTELLIGENT DESIGN AND
FINE TUNING ARGUMENTS
(scientists)