arguments based on observation Flashcards
(17 cards)
what does Aquinas’ fifth way state
if things have purpose, it suggests a designer has designed that object with that purpose in mind
the fifth way is taken from the governance of the world, we can see that things have a purpose, things lack intelligence and act for an end. whatever lacks intelligence cant move to an end unless its being guided to an end by something endowed with knowledge and intelligence- he calls this being God
what is the A03 for this
he creates a logical fallacy by assuming that this being is God
he makes an assumption about purpose but we can never come to a conclusion on somethings purpose
aquinas falls to empiricism, our senses decieve us and we should use a rational approach if we want to come to a conclusion
what is paleys watchmaker analogy
a watch has carefully been constructed by a watchmaker with the purpose of telling the time. he compares this to the observation of natural things that seem mechanical and have a purpose e.g. the eye, feet, wings. paley came to the conclusion that theres a conscious mind that intentionally designs these things and this designer is God.
what did paley then extend this into
design qua regularity, paley infers a designer due to the consistent order and pattern in the natural world. e.g. the rotation of planets and gravity are ordered,regular and predictable.
how does paley overcome criticisms.
if a watch was broken or unable to tell the time, we can still see that the watch had a purpose
what is the a03 for this
there are too many faults in this world to suggest God created it- link to the fall, evidential problem o evil
high face validity- we can see purpose in the world
bring in paleys counter argument
what are humes problems with analogies
they lead to mistaken conclusions e.g. the analogy of the blood circulatory in humans can be applied to other animals but not how sap works in plants
this can also be seen through design arguments, they always jump to a conclusion of Gods, but never multiple designers in the world, this makes sense considering the fact that our world is very faulty
what are the problem with observations
not only do senses deceive us, we cant apply what we see in some parts of the world to all parts of the world(fallacy composition)
hume uses an example of set of balancing scales with one pan hidden. we can only guess what is causing the weight on the hidden side. much like observing the world we cant see or assume theres a God.
what is the a03 for this
hume is poking the bear, he is trying to say teleoligical arguments are bad because they rely on purpose but theyre meant to
paley responded to his criticisms
paley argues even if we didnt see the watch being made we would still argue a design and a designer
what are the 3 ways of aquinas’ cosmological argument
motion, cause and contingency
what is the way of motion
nothing can change or move by itself there cant be an infinite regress of movers, therefore there must be a unmoved mover that cant be changed or moved itself but it started the chain of movement, he calls this mover God
what is the argument of cause
aquinas says the universe is a result of a succession of causes. there cant be a chain of causes so their must be a first cause that was uncaused to start the chain of caues. he calls this cause God
what is the argument of contingency
everything is contingent- it can either exist or not exists, there was a time when nothing existed but something exists now, how can something come from nothing? there is a necessary being that brought these things into existence (God)
how was leibnizs’ thinking similar to aquinas
imagine a series of books, each one copied from a previous manuscript. theres no explanation for the series of books as a whole- why was there a book at all, why was there a first book. leibiz explained theres a sufficient reason for it. way 3 shows as its possible for there to be nothing now, the reason for the world we experience now is God, a neccesary being.
what is the a03 for this
cause and effect could just be a correlation rather than cause and effect,they can occur together but we cant be sure one caused the other
aquinas once again makes a leap of logic, just because one thing in the world is contingent doesnt mean everything else is contingent
the jump to a God is also another assumption, why are we assuming the creator is a God, what if its a deist creator
how does hume criticise cosmological arguments through cause and effect
hume says inductive reasoning leads to assumptions rather than certain conclusions, we dont know that the sun will rise tomorrow but we assume so through previous evidence. although we have observed cause and effect in some parts of the world e.g. the parents in childbirth we shouldnt make a leap to say everything has a cause.
how else does he criticse the cosmological argument
how come God is his own special, who is the causer of God, what if the universe is its own cause
