1.1 the design argument

Question 1

What is an inductive argument?

Answer 1

Process of reasoning from particular instances to general and probable conclusions.

Conclusion cannot be guarenteed

Question 2

What does posteriori mean?

Answer 2

What comes after, e.g uses experiences that have already happened

Question 3

What is deductive reasoning?

Answer 3

A process of reasoning from a general principal which is applied to a particular circumstance

Question 4

What are key features of an inductive argument?

Answer 4

• Uses a posteriori knowledge, based on sense and experience
• An argument from a probable solution

What we speculate about what isnt known

Question 5

Are inductive arguments effective?

Answer 5

FOR:
* helps us gain an understanding of the world around us
* allows for new theories to be tested and proved accurate or not

AGAINST:
* Only ever probable
* based on assumptions
* must be proved through testing

Question 6

What is the definition of an A posteriori argument?

Answer 6

Reasoning based on experience

Question 7

What are the key features of an A Posteriori argument?

Answer 7

Tested using evidence, which provides probable answers

Question 8

What is an example of A Posteriori argument?

Answer 8

Barbados in the off season is very humid

I have experienced Barbados in the off season so i can make an A posteriori argument

Question 9

What is an example of an argument not derived from experience?

Answer 9

There are 360 degrees in a circle

This is not an experience but a fact discovered through other means

Question 10

Summarise the Design argument

Answer 10

• We experience a world that is designed with order within the universe e.g the seasons
• The universe appears to be designed by a supreme being e.g God
• Everything is so perfect that it cannot be chance and someone must have designed it e.g the earths position from the sun

Question 11

What are the key features of the Design argument?

Answer 11

• It is an inductive argument
• A posteriori reasoning
• teleological: concerned with the meaning and purpose of the world
• Based on an analogy - comparing something we don’t know to something we do (the universe is compared to a watch)

Question 12

Name some examples of design in the universe

Answer 12

• The fibonacci sequence
• a birds wing
• the human eye

Question 13

what are the PROS of the Design argument?

Answer 13

• It uses evidence

Question 14

What are the CONS of the design argument?

Answer 14

• it will only ever be probable
• the world doesn’t always seem ordered e.g natural disasters and poverty
• God didnt create us with a purpose, we evolved

Question 15

What is William Paley famous for?

Answer 15

The watch analogy, arguing the exsistance of God as designer

Question 16

What is an anology?

Answer 16

c comparison between two things with similar ideas, udes to explain the less farmiliar idea.

eg Life is like a box of chocolates you never know what you’re gonna get

Question 17

Give an outline of the DA in its analogical form

Answer 17

• If you find a watch on a heath, it requires explanation because the watch has been put there for a purpose (to tell time)- a design and a designer
• the watch= the world
• everything is ordered, regular and has a purpose

Question 18

How essential is order and regularity to the DA?

Answer 18

regularity:
* a watch works by having regular mechanical movements
* The watch maker is resposible for the regularity in the watch
* regularity in the universe = designer

Question 19

Is the DA more or less effective in its analogical form?

Answer 19

• God wouldn’t be the perfect intelligent designer if the universe didnt work with regularity
• Useful to have something we have with experience with compared to something we have less experience with
• The same cause does not mean the same outcome

Question 20

What argument did Swinburne support?

Answer 20

the argument from probability

Question 21

What is the argument from probability?

Answer 21

design in the universe increases the probability of the exsistance of God
It is more probable that God exists than God doesnt exist

Question 22

What arguments did F.R Tenant support?

Answer 22

The asthetic argument
The anthropic principal

Question 23

What is the asthetic argument?

Answer 23

the universe has a natural beauty beyond means of survival, must of been put there for humans to observe.

Question 24

What is the anthropic principal?

Answer 24

The reason and purpose for the universe is for human survival

known as the goldilocks principal sometimes

Question 25

What is the **regularities of co-presence**?

Answer 25

everyone fits together and shares space on earth.

Question 26

What does **Swinburne** say about the **regularities of co-presence**?

Answer 26

Says in order to survive organisms must work together, and they must have **spacial order**. | e.g organ systems in the body work together to keep the human alive

Question 27

What does **Swinburne** say about **regularities of succession**?

Answer 27

There is temporal order- laws of nature are absolute. One thing follows another in a predictable order

Question 28

Give reasons that the DA is less effective than due to the **asthetic** arument, the **regularities of succession** and the **anthropic** principal

Answer 28

* order and beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Lots of things are not beautiful e.g indian slums * why has god taken millions of years of experimentation to create the human race * Any animal could feel special like humans feel special and chosen

Question 29

what is **theism**?

Answer 29

How God interacts with the universe and humans- imanent

Question 30

what is **deism**?

Answer 30

God fine tuned the universe and then left the machinery to work without interference of any kind- transcendent

Question 31

How does **David Hume** **criticise** the DA?

Answer 31

* **analogies** do not work well. Watch analogy is '**false**' as there are not enough **similarities** between a watch and the universe( not as damaging as other criticisms)

Question 32

Is the DA made less effective by **David Hume's criticisms**?

Answer 32

* YES- we have so little experience of the world * NO- all of science is based on **inductive** arguments

Question 33

What problem did **Darwin** and **Dawkins** support?

Answer 33

The problem of **evolution**

Question 34

What is the problem of **evolution** and how does it oppose the DA?

Answer 34

All species weren't created, but **evolved**, or adapted over **billions of years** to suit their environment. Meaning God didn't create/ design us with a **purpose**.

Question 35

What problem did **Hume** and **Mill** support?

Answer 35

The problem of **evil and suffering**

Question 36

How does the problem of **Evil and suffering** oppose the DA?

Answer 36

The world is **not a beautiful ordered place**, but one with **poor design** and an **absence of order** e.g wasp injects eggs into living catterpillar. Meaning that God didnt deisgn it as everything would be ordered.

Question 37

What problem did **Hume** support?

Answer 37

The problem of **anthropomorphism**

Question 38

How does the problem of **anthropomorphism** oppose the DA

Answer 38

The watch analogy presents God as the **watchmaker** with **human** qualities e.g he could make mistakes. It removes God's **divine traits**, makes him like a human not a God.

Question 39

How damaging is the effect of **evolution** to the DA?

Answer 39

Evolution could be a part of God's **plan**, so not very damaging.

Question 40

How damaging is the effect of **evil and suffering** to the DA?

Answer 40

Evil and suffering is a result of **free will** given to humans by God, so not very damaging

Question 41

How damaging is the effect of **anthropomorphism** to the DA?

Answer 41

It is only damaging if you rely on the argument from **analogy** which not all DAs do, damaging effect depends.

Question 42

Is the **DA** made more **effective** by other criticisms? | Yes and No

Answer 42

YES * There is evidence on the side of science * rules out need for further explanation NO * Scientists could prove the DA wrong