Arguments From Observation

Question 1

Paley’s argument for regularity

Answer 1

• observation of objects that experience regularity
• Example - seasons, gravity
• examples such as the relationship between the planets, the regular rotations and the predictable effects of gravity
• these could not have come about without a designer
• there must be a calculating being who purposefully created the universe according to a well constructed plan

Question 2

Paley’s argument for purpose

Answer 2

• things were put together deliberately with a purpose
• example - eye to see, wing to fly
• this points to a designer

Question 3

Paley’s analogy of the watch

Answer 3

• the designer couldn’t have made it by change
• the world is more complex therefore there must be a creator
• arguments use understanding of machines to conclude that the world must be a machine
• you can see the telos of a watch like you can see the telos of the universe
• pointed out that a watch doesn’t need to fully be understood or working and that the world is more complex than a watch

Question 4

Aquinas teleological argument

Answer 4

• way 5
• we cannot achieve purpose without something to make it happen
• example of an archer

Question 5

Aquinas argument from the governance of the world

Answer 5

• things that lack knowledge act for a purpose
• acting for an end leads to the best result
• happens not by luck but by designer
• anything that lacks knowledge needs something to guide it
• there is an intelligent being that directs things to their end
• this is God

Question 6

Aquinas argument from analogy

Answer 6

• Archer and arrow
• in the same way an archer guides an arrow, God guides natural bodies to where they are meant to go
• natural body needs purpose just like the arrow needs to go to its target

Question 7

Strengths of the teleological argument

Answer 7

• examples in nature of non-thinking beings that act to achieve purpose
• correct that an arrow needs an archer in the same way it is reasonable to assume that all natural things are directed towards a purpose
• aquinas is the right that weekend an explanation for purpose - God works
• Swinburne - God is the simplest explanation of design in the universe

Question 8

Teleological weaknesses

Answer 8

• could be another explanation for apparent purpose, they have evolved to suit environment
• assumption about purpose, what is purpose could be chance
• Aquinas is accused of a logically fallacy - a leap to the God of classic theism

Question 9

Hume criticism of the teleological argument

Answer 9

• Not necessarily true that the world is like a watch
• true that a watch looks as it its designed but hard to say the same of the world with these characteristics
• it is more like veg with characteristics of intricacy
• epicurean hypothesis
• our world is finite and imperfect why is God infinite and perfect
• trial and error
• first rued attempt
• number of designers
• immoral designer

Question 10

Aquinas way 1

Answer 10

• unmoved mover
• things move from actuality to potentiality
• nothing can move by itself
• cannot be an infinite regress of movers
• must be an unmoved mover
• this is God

Question 11

Aquinas way 2

Answer 11

• uncaused causer
• everything is as a result of causes
• nothing can be its own cause
• cannot be infinite regress of causes
• must be uncaused causer
• God

Question 12

Aquinas way 3

Answer 12

• contingency and necessity
• everything in the universe is contingent
• must have been a time of nothing
• must be a necessary being that brought it into existence
• this is God

Question 13

Hume criticism of cosmological

Answer 13

• inductive reasoning leads to probable conclusions, we can only observe a limited amount and should not make the assumption that cause and effect apply to anything outside of our experience
• fallacy of composition - cannot make a jump that because everything in the universe has a cause the universe as a whole has a cause
• what is the cause of God (special case for God)? Could the universe not be necessary, there is no need for it to be contingent
• why not accept infinite regress, why does it have to be impossible
• even if we accept the universe has a cause, this does not have to be a God of classical theism, it could be a different type of god or being - another leap in logic

Question 14

Cosmological strengths

Answer 14

• way 1 = we can observe motion and change
• way 2 = we can see cause and effect
• way 3 = we can observe contingent things that rely on other things to exist
• observation - we can infer that there is a first mover, causer and necessary.

Question 15

Cosmological weaknesses

Answer 15

• it is just as reasonable to assume that there could be infinite regress
• possible that what we understand to be cause and effect is correlation
• leap in logic - doesn’t mean that the universe is contingent
• jump to the idea that God is the necessary

Question 16

Logical fallacies

Answer 16

• assumption that all things are moved, have a cause or purpose, are contingent
• infinite regression - things can go back infinitely but doesn’t explain why it was there in the first place
• jump to transcendent creation - jump to far (Aquinas pointing to aspects not proving)
• special case of God, not clear why God has to be a special case
• regularity and order - could have come about by chance

Question 17

Evolution

Answer 17

• challenges the teleological argument
• alternative explanation to how the world exists
• no need for a designer if evolution is accepted

Question 18

Believers and evolution

Answer 18

• believers feel that evolution works alongside belief in God
• tool that God used to make things the way they are

Question 19

Tenant - Anthropic principle

Answer 19

• modern teleological argument
• there is too much that has gone right for it to have come about by chance
• this world is finely balanced to allow life to exist - the favourable conditions suggest a designer

Question 20

Tenant - Aesthetic principle

Answer 20

• modern teleological argument
• humans appreciate music, art and beauty which have no survival value - this implies a benevolent designer
• the ability to recognise beauty has not come about by evolution

Question 21

Dawkins

Answer 21

‘Life is byte and bytes of digital information’

• cosmological argument criticism
• the ‘blind watchmaker’ - the process is blind, there is no overall purpose, evolution is carried on through random but cumulative mutations in DNA which produce variations in living organisms

Question 22

Morowitz - counter chance

Answer 22

• he looked at the probability for the existence of life in the universe
• concluded - the universe would have to be trillions of times older and larger for a protein molecule to have occurred by chance
• the chances of a protein molecule occurring by chance is 1:10^236

Question 23

Hoyle - counter chance

Answer 23

• the probability of life originating by chance is as likely as a hurricane raging through a junk yard and producing a Boeing 747

Question 24

Swinburne - counter chance

Answer 24

• maybe only if order is there can we know that there is order, but it is still extraordinary and needs an explanation
• God is a better ultimate explanation than the brute fact of the universe

Question 25

Paley’s response to potential criticism

Answer 25

- even if we had never seen a watch before, we would still infer a designer (just as we have not seen God in the world) - even if a watch did not work perfectly (just as there are faults in our world) there is still evidence of some desitgn

Question 26

Examples

Answer 26

- Mackie - infinite hooks - Leibniz - series of book copied from a pervious book - inuits in new york

Question 27

Leibniz - For CA

Answer 27

- Can’t be infinite regress - even if it is possible it is not a full response for something happening - principle of sufficient reason - example of a series of books, each manuscript being copied from the previous one - there is no explanation for the series as a whole

Question 28

Copleston - for CA

Answer 28

- everything in the universe is contingent - universe is a sum of contingent things - the universe itself is contingent - this must be self-explanatory, necessary being - this gives a full and sufficient reason for existence of the universe

Question 29

Russell - against CA

Answer 29

- the universe requires no explanation - every man who exists has a mother therefore the human race must have a mother, but obviously the human race hasn't a mother - that's a different logical sphere - the universe may have reached this point in its existence because of a whole series of causes but this does not mean that there has to be one great cause behind it all - uses Hume's 'brute fact' argument - the universe Just is and that's a fact that needs no further explanation we do not need to question why

Question 30

Mackie - against CA

Answer 30

- why couldn’t we imagine infinite regress | - leap in logic

Question 31

Kant - against CA

Answer 31

- causality is just the way our minds like to see the world - we impose the idea of cause and effect onto the world, the noumenal world can't be experienced by the senses - if there is no causality, the Aquinas' way 2 does not make sense - there can be no first or uncaused causer

Question 32

Goldilocks principle

Answer 32

the earth is just the right distance from the sun for life to evolve

Question 33

strengths of a priori

Answer 33

- rely only on reason and logic - so are not deceived by the senses - the premises lead to a certain conclusion - concepts can be defined a priori and do not rely on empirical evidence that can be interpreted in different ways

Question 34

strengths of a posteriori

Answer 34

- it relies on empiricism, sense and observation which everyone can experience and verify - the evidence leads to a probable conclusion - arguing from what is known, to what is unknown

Question 35

weaknesses of a priori

Answer 35

- based on human definitions - we can define a triangle because we have seen it; how can an unknowable metaphysical being be defined - it may only be possible to know a priori definition, not whether these things exist in reality - if we deny the premises are valid the conclusion cannot be valid (KANT)

Question 36

weaknesses of a posteriori

Answer 36

- the same evidence is available to all BUT it can lead to different conclusions (wisdom parable) - limitations of the senses - only true for today, cannot get outside of our perception to check if it is correct (KANT)

Question 37

EXTRA: ontological logical fallacies

Answer 37

- assumption: existence is a predicate and analytic, existence is not synthetic - God is the greatest conceivable being or supremely perfect being, logically necessary