Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Hume's arguments against God - Coggle Diagram
Hume's arguments against God
Like effects only prove like causes. A bad analogy weakens the argument for design (If a house is built by a builder then the universe is designed by an intelligent God)
Infinite
“First, by this method of reasoning you renounce all claim to infinity in any of the attributes of the Deity. For, as the cause ought only to be proportioned to the effect, and the effect, so far as it falls under our cognizance, is not infinite”
God is not infinite, even the most beautiful of houses does not last forever
Corporealality
“And why not become a perfect anthropomorphite? Why not assert the deity or deities to be corporeal, and to have eyes, a nose, mouth, ears, etc.?”
Builders of a house has a corporeal body, therefore God has a mortal body.
Perfection
“Secondly, you have no reason, on your theory, for ascribing perfection to the Deity,”
God is not perfect because a house that is constructed by a builder is never perfect. It always has room for improvement
David Hume is an empiricist
Empiricist = Believes that everything we know is through experience
May admit that the universe is designed by a creator. But according to his experiences this creator is not limited to...
Just one creator. Could be multiple creators
Created on the first go
A benvelonet, kind, caring creator (With all the suffering that is present in the world)
When you are comparing God to a builder, you are admitting into Anthropomorphism
The universe is an animalistic body than an intentional mind since our universe is an imperfect place of corruption
Then we should observe God as if He has a body
The Three Characters
Cleanthes
Most similar to an orthodox Christian like Aquinas. Attempts to bridge reason with theology
Demea
Believes that there is a god but not so much about who God is. Basically Aquinas with no revelation or theology
Philo
The skeptic on God’s existence, question all anthropomorphic ideas of the divine that there is one God
Hume's take on miracles
Miracles relies on testimony
Testimonies is not sufficient to prove miracles are true
Testimony is susceptible to exaggeration and lies
A miracle is a violation of the laws of nature
Miracles are random/inconsistent nature
We should always looks for an explanation that is a consistent experience with the laws of human nature
Theodicy
is the defense of statement for God on a moral level
Aka the problem for evil
If the world is filled with evil why would experience lead me to a benevolent, moral, loving God
If there is a God… why is there suffering the world?