strengths of PADA

Question 1

strength 1 - xn god

Answer 1

paley might be right to argue that the designer is all powerful xn god, as this is the simplest explanation.

richard swinburne argues that ‘simplicity is always evidence for the truth’

Question 2

strenth 2 - evil

Answer 2

paley argued that evil may be unavoidable in order for god to bring about good.

this can be supported in many ways eg:

• free will defense
• process theology
• hick’s soul making theodicy

the point is not which theory is the best explanation of evil, and more that when paley argues that evil may be unavoidable, he may be right

Question 3

strength 3 - evolution

Answer 3

evolution does not destroy PADA because evolution does not explain itself, and also evolution is compatible with belief in god.

richard swinburne that evolution . explains nothing, as it is governed by the laws of physics, bio and chem, and those laws do not explain themselves, and we need to ask where those laws come from.

evolution can be compatible with god as many xns accept evolution because they believe god designed evolution in order to create humans

Question 4

strength 4 - anthropomorphism

Answer 4

despite his anthropomorphic language, the conclusion . that the designer exists beyond the universe seems reasonable; the designer must be metaphysical, since it . would be impossible to design such a system from the inside

Question 5

strength 5 - order

Answer 5

paley’s argument that ‘nature shows intention’ is stronger when supported by the AP.
the AP points out that there are 30 or more cosmological constants that would need to be fine-tuned to exactly as they are in order for us to exist, so the universe couldn’t simply be like this just by chance

Question 6

strength 6 - simplicity

Answer 6

the argument is simple and inductive, and based on what we observe and what we observe is design

Question 7

summary of debate between hume and strengths?

Answer 7

G od - xn god or no?
E vil - explanation for evil in the universe?
EvolutionVegetable- does the argument work with TOE? is the world a machine or a vegetable lol?
A nthropomorphism - does paley’s use of language fail to create a good analogy
O rder - is the universe ordered by chance, or does the AP have a point?
S implicity - does the simplicity of the argument make it stronger?