Teleological Arguments for the existence of God
This paper will examine the argument put forward by William Paley in 1802, in his Natural Theology. Paley offers an argument from design that purports to show a clear and distinct reason why one should hold a belief in God, due to the inherent features of the world. It is attempted in this paper to firstly: show that the argument should be rejected on the grounds of lacking a rationally flowing set of premises and conclusions; and secondly: that the criticisms made by David Hume concerning the argument hold more weight than is generally granted by other philosophers, and should have convinced one even before the advent of Darwinian theory. Added to this, it will be considered as to whether or not Darwin actually did destroy teleological arguments forever. William Paley's teleological argument is but one example of the formulation of an argument from design, but nevertheless one that deserves some attention. Although the origins of the thesis can be reasonably traced back as far as ancient Greek philosophy, in the form of Lucilius Bablos, Paley's version was the true precursor for later deliberations on the subject, as it was the first to truly attempt to affirm God's existence by ap
pealing to an inference to the best explanation on the grounds of intuitively observable datum. However, this may not be a just interpretation. Perhaps one could say that Paley's argument is deductive, in the sense that he first establishes a principle and, coupled with other seemingly plausible premises, uses it in order to reach his desired conclusion. Although he constantly uses the word 'inference', it is far from clear that he is actually inferring anything, procuring to the general usage of the term. In any event, there is little doubt th! P5. These biological entities could not have arisen from a random distribution or chance configuration of molecules. Roughly speaking, teleological arguments are those that appeal to the special features, or aspects, of the world that appear to be designed and purposive, analogous to the cases of human design. For example, one might consider complex biological systems such as eyes, digestive or reproductive structures, and so on. They are usually put probabilistically, arguing that the most plausible explanation is that of a world designer and creator - one with intelligence and purposes. It is not clear that Paley's argument was intended to be just so, but more on this at a later stage. P7. These systems are often the cause of pain and suffering in the creatures they pertain to; eg: childbirth. Some of the systems cause pain as a part of their distinct purpose; eg: nervous systems. C. The world is the creation of an intelligent designer, and that designer is God. Next, one may consider the argument along deductive lines, although this is perhaps an unfair interpretation: P6. If a watch is immediately recognisable as the work of an intelligent designer, then the same must be said of complex biological entities. P4. These systems are (highly) comparable to things like watches in terms of having a distinctive purpose or function, ie: intuitive evidence of intentional design.
Some common words found in the essay are:
Tennant Swinburne, C1 Hence, Christian God's, God Firstly, Dialogues Alternatively, Conversely Sober, Dawkins Sober, Bablos Paley's, Fine Tuning, P4 Nature, intelligent designer, paley's argument, intelligent design, teleological argument, biological systems, inference explanation, complex biological, product intelligent, product intelligent design, apparent design, world product, world product intelligent, complex biological systems, recognisable intelligent designer, apparent design nature,
Approximate Word count = 2542
Approximate Pages = 10 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
