Design argument Flashcards
what was the argument qua regularity?
P- the watch shows regularity and all things in universe are regular
E- watch: regular in seconds, minutes and hours
universe: earth orbits sun every 365 days, the seasons
E. if watch shows design through regularity and so does universe
what is argument qua complexity ?
P- watch is like our eye in complexity
E- watch has many thing which make it up eg lens pupil and iris
EX- if watch needs a maker bc its complex the so does our universe
what is the argument qua purpose?
P- watch is like eye because they both have a purpose/telos
E- watch tells time eye helps us see
EX- if watch must require maker cos it has purpose then so does eye and all creation
what was Humes bad builder argument?
P- if god designed universe god is a bad designer
E- bad building = bad builder
earth is flawed eg natural evil
EX- god is bad designer
what was humes bad analogy argument
P- analogy fails because eye is not like the watch
E- watch starts in perfect condition and gets worse
eye starts bad and gets better and can get bad again
EX if the analogy is irrelevant it doesn’t stand so argument fails
what was Humes ship argument?
P-even if universe is designed there is no reasn to assume one being designed it
E-ship requires more than one person to build the same can apply to universe
EX- doesn’t have to be god of classical theism
what are strengths of teleo arg?
- watch analogy is reasonable bc eye is complex
- (rep to god is complex) plato argues that god is not complex forms are simple bc they indivisible god is a single entity
- plants are relevant to watch analogy
- natural evil is necessary without it there is no free will
- god designed evolution to appear random
what are some weaknesses of argument?
- if complex things need designer who designed god
- bad analogy
- bad designer
- god is complex because trinity and all his characteristics
- evaluation- things can appear from random mutation
why is it of value to faith?
-supports faith by reasoning
- doesn’t prove gods existence but demonstrates that god can be
thought about locally
-supports natural theology
-can be used against theism bc atheist don’t have more proof for gods existence than theist
-paleys argument is so simple and understandable it can provide a basis of belief
-
why is it not of value to faith?
-faith only depends on commitment to god
why is it of value to proof
-paleys argument can be argued to be the best explation of the order of uni eg regularity
-proof can be inductive
-evidence is sufficiant
e jury and convincing lawyer
why is it not proof?
- to those of faith it isnt proof bc gods existence can only be proven through experiencing it
- inductive arguments are more logical and inductive isnt
- paleys evidence doesn’t amount to scientific proof
- multiverse can be true which can explain the complexity and regularity
- way earth orbit is down to gravity and how matter behaves
