Posteriori Arguments Flashcards
(27 cards)
Why is the cosmological argument a posteriori argument?
It uses empiricism to gain knowledge about the existence of God.
What does Aquinas propose:
In summa theologica Aquinas presents 5 ways to prove God’s existence, the first three are cosmological.
What are Aquinas 3 cosmological argument?
> the unmoved mover, everything in the world is in ‘motus’ motion, there cannot be an infinite regress of movers, God caused the motus the change from potential to actual.
Uncaused causer, cause and effect exist in the world, ‘if you eliminate cause you eliminate its effects’ there must be an uncaused causer.
Contingency and necessity, everything relies upon something else for its existence, this pattern cannot go on forever as infinite regression is impossible, God is the necessary being.
Challenges- David Hume
1st criticism: fallacy of composition, just because the universe is explained through causes it doesn’t mean there is a cause to the universe as a whole.
What example does Hume use?
The example of twenty particles; if you have twenty particles and can explain each individually you cannot take a step back and seek an explanation for the existence of all of them.
What is Hume second criticism:
‘Fallacy of affirmation of the consequent’; we assume there is a relationship between cause and effect but as ‘a matter of logic’ not all effects have causes. We have no real experience of the creation of the universe.
How does J.L Mackie support this critique
‘There is a permanent stock of matter whose essence did not involve existence from anything else’
How does Bertrand Russel criticise God as a creator?
> only analytical statements are ‘necessary’
You cannot have a necessary being as a ‘being’ or ‘God’ is a synthetic statement and needs proof.
without proof God’s existence is meaningless.
Russell continues…
> why can’t the universe exist without cause and effect
cause and effect will stretch infinitely into the future so why not the past.
And if God is the explanation for everything surely he needs an explanation.
How does Leibiniz defend God as a creator:
We can use Leibiniz argument of sufficient reason and apply it to the existence of God.
> the argument of sufficient reason argues there must be more in the cause than the effect, meaning the cause of the universe must be great, hinting at a celestial body of power.
Quote from Socrates:
‘With such signs of forethought in the design of living creatures, can you doubt that they are the worth of choice design’
What is the teleological argument the study of ?
The study of telos relating to the idea everything is designed for purpose.
Why is it a posteriori argument?
It gains knowledge for the world to infer.
What is William Paley’s argument?
> ’design qua purpose’
everything that is designed has a purpose
What example does Paley use to demonstrate?
> The example of a watch
imagine your walking ‘upon a heath’ and spot a pocket watch on ground, it is obvious it didn’t simply spawn there it has design as highlighted by the intricate clock work and cogs which are perfectly designed to allow the clock to function. It clearly has a designer shown by the craftsmen ship in the watch.
Paley relates the watch to intricate design in our world such as the human eye, it is a piece of craftsmanship which implys we have a designer (God)
What did Paley state in his analogy?
‘Every manifestation or design which existed in the watch, exists in the world of nature’
What did Cicero add to the teleological argument.
‘What would be more clear or obvious when we look up at the sky and contemplate the heavens, than that there is some divine or superior intelligence’.
What is the second part of Paley’s argument?
-‘design quality regularity’
> Paley looked at the skies and astronomy noticing regularity and routine which couldn’t have come about via chance.
> Simply must have been a designer.
Breakdown Aquinas’s teleological argument:
‘If everything operates as to a design, this design is from God’
> ‘Design qua regularity’ is the fifth of Aquinas 5 arguments in Summa theologica.
> Objects follow natural laws and is the reason they perform their jobs efficiently
> everything that doesn’t think follows natural laws set out by a designer
>’this being we call God’
Explain Aquinas archer + arrow metaphor:
‘Regularity of succession’
> An arrow hits its target even though it doesn’t have a mind of its own
> it is controlled by an archer
> things in the natural world follow natural law
> God is the archer we are the arrow
Hume’s criticism in ‘dialogues concerning a natural religion’ has 5 arguments against:
> Problem of Evil
Why is God the designer
Cannot give the universe a designer just because elements show design.
Why one designer
World is not a machine but an organic thing.
What is Hume’s epicurean argument?
> Hume attempts to explain the creation using the Epicurean hypothesis
that in the beginning of time particles in a random motion over time they become ordered.
How does Dawkins challenge arguments of observation
The world is so problematic God must be blind.
> ‘no purpose, no evil and no good nothing but blind indifference’ - the blind watchmaker.
How does Darwinism challenge the teleological argument?
Provides a differing argument for life, arguing not of a designer but of evolution and ‘survival of the fittest’. Not the designer God.
