What type of argument is arguments based on observation?
Teleological, argument from design
What was Aquinas’s fifth way?
Unconscious organisms act to achieve the best result. This shows that they are acting intelligently. Acting intelligently is an act of design, not luck. As these organisms lack reason, they must be directed externally. An external rational director exists. This external director is God.
What is Paley’s Watch argument?
Anything which has complexity and purpose has been designed. Living organisms have complexity and purpose similar to pieces of technology. Living organisms, like humans, were therefore designed. Unlike items of technology, living organisms were not designed by us. They were designed by something else, and something greater than us must have designed us. Therefore, they must have been designed by God who is a higher intelligence.
What is Paley’s defence against chance?
“What does chance ever do for us?” - Paley
Complex, purposeful objects like a watch cannot arise by chance but require an intelligent designer, it is wrong to say it happened by chance.
What are problems with Paley’s argument?
- Why is the world so bad if it had a perfect designer
- Why couldn’t all of this have happened by accident
- Just because a part of the whole is designed, e.g. an eye, doesn’t mean the whole itself is designed
What is Hume’s objection to Paley?
- The world and the watch are unlike each other, you shouldn’t compare them
- The analogy of a man-made thing is bound to lead to the conclusion that the universe was designed. But Hume points out that we already have experience or knowledge of watches being made, and so this just begs the question when it comes to the universe
What is the idea of the Prime Mover to prove God’s existence?
Everything is in motion.
Whatever is moved must be moved by something else. There must be a first mover, otherwise this causes an infinite regress.
This must be God.
What is the idea of the first cause to prove God’s existence?
In the world, things have efficient causes.
It is impossible for a thing to be its own efficient cause. The chain of cause and effect must be finite for it to work. Therefore there must be a first efficient cause, otherwise this causes an infinite regress. There must be a first efficient cause, which is God.
What’s the argument from necessity and contingency to prove God’s existence?
In nature there are things which are contingent.
It is impossible for them always to have existed, because that which is contingent comes in and out of existence. Not everything can be like this because it would mean that at one time there was nothing. If there were nothing then there would be nothing now. So, not all things are contingent; there must exist something that is necessary, as the existence of contingency is dependent on this. We have to admit the existence of some being whose necessity lies in itself. This is God.
What is the principle of sufficient reason?
Leibniz:
P1 - All contingent facts/reasons/causes must have an explanation.
P2 - The explanation of all contingency cannot be another contingency though (as these are the things being explained).
C1 - It must be a necessary fact.
C2 - It’s God.
What is Hume/Russell’s objection to a necessary being?
P1: The concept of ‘necessary’ can only be applied to propositions not to ‘beings’, and in particular to propositions that are analytic.
P2: An analytic proposition is one that is self-contradictory to deny.
P3: It is not self-contradictory to say ‘God does not exist.’
C: ‘God exists’ is not analytic and is not a necessary proposition.
C2: Therefore it’s subject to confirmation by experience.
What is the Anthropic Principle?
F.R Tennant - The Universe is eerily well-tuned to produce our existence (cf. the ‘Goldilocks Zone’).
Values measuring the laws of creation show that the design of the universe is incredibly precise and just a small change to these values would make our existence impossible.
This must show intelligent design.
What is an objection to the Anthropic Principle?
This is not just ‘anthropic’, it’s ‘anthropocentric’. Douglas Adams - A puddle wondering in awe about the perfect size of the hole that it sits in!!!
‘Perfect for me’ doesn’t exclude being created by accident.
