Teleological argument

Question 1

define teleological?

Answer 1

looking at the end result to draw a conclusion about what is right or wrong

Question 2

define cosmological?

Answer 2

looking at the world to draw conclusions about the universe and how it was created

Question 3

name all the scholars involved?
5 of them

Answer 3

William Paley
Aquinas x2
Dawkins
Hume
Leibniz

Question 4

what is William paleys book?

Answer 4

‘Natural theology’

Question 5

what were the two designs paley argued about?

Answer 5

‘design qua regulatory’
‘design qua purpose’

everything has a specific order and everything has a specific purpose when created

Question 6

what analogy did paley use?

Answer 6

analogy of a watch on a heath, believed you can look at a watch that was lying on a heath , would notice how the watch worked and would conclude someone who have made the watch rather than it existing by chance.

Question 7

did paley believe science could be used?

Answer 7

YES he agreed science can be used to show design like how a plant is structured

Question 8

what was Aquinas’ book?

Answer 8

‘Summa Theologica’

Question 9

finish the quote by Aquinas “we see things…”
what does it mean?

Answer 9

“we see things which lack knowledge” - we see things that don’t have a brain move in a way that couldn’t be possible without a divine being like a river , its an inanimate object

Question 10

what does an inanimate object mean?

Answer 10

lacking conscienceness

Question 11

what is Dawkins book?

Answer 11

‘Selfish gene’

Question 12

finish the quote by Dawkins “no purpose…”

Answer 12

“no purpose, no good, no evil” - the blind watchmaker

Question 13

why did Dawkins reject a divine being creating the world? what did he believe brought design into the world?

Answer 13

Believed natural selection and evolution is what changed the human eye for example to see how it sees, as the alleles get selected for their purpose

CA: AO2: but how did these genes be brought about in the beginning? yes we have evolution but how did humanity first be brought here to earth for evolution to happen?

Question 14

did Dawkins believe humanity is JUST a survival machine?

Answer 14

yes he did believed we are only here to replicate out genes and reproduce

Question 15

how many years was David Humes argument before or after Paley?

Answer 15

BEFORE - 23 years

Question 16

why did Hume reject paleys watch analogy?

Answer 16

believed the comparison between the world and a watch was weak, you couldn’t compare a technology mechanism to nature

you wouldn’t pick the watch up and think of the creator, would rather question why its there

Question 17

what was Humes second reason to reject the teleological argument?

Answer 17

order within the world doesn’t make someone immediately jump to the conclusion of a divine being caused it to happen

Question 18

what did Hume argue about our world and how we can’t compare it to another world?

Answer 18

argued we don’t have another world to compare our own world. we have no other standards so we can’t draw a conclusion because we don’t have a world to compare a Godless world too

Question 19

why did Hume believe we had order within our world?

Answer 19

without order our world would be full of chaos so as a humanity we brought in rules and an order ourselves to have a peaceful society , without order nothing would survive

Question 20

what analogy did Hume use to describe his argument?

Answer 20

analogy of weighting scales
on one end is a 1kg weight and the other end is unknown but we know it heavier.
argued we can make assumptions and guess what the other weight is but we will never be certain , so how can we be certain about whether a God created the world from looking at the world?
the cause of our world is hidden

CA: synoptic link to religious experiences God making himself directly known

Question 21

what is Leibniz book?

Answer 21

‘Monadology’

Question 22

why did Leibniz reject an a priori argument?

Answer 22

argued the universe is better understood in terms of space and time rather than facts

Question 23

what question did Leibniz raise about the universe?

Answer 23

‘why is there something rather than nothing?’

Question 24

what is the principle of sufficient reason?
who developed it?

Answer 24

Leibniz
everything that exists must have a reason or cause for it’s existence
ie: if something exists must be a reason why
if something is true must be a reason why
if something happens must be a reason why

Question 25

did Leibniz believe the being who developed the universe needed to be eternal?

Answer 25

no he just argued there has to be a reason WHY

Question 26

what example did Leibniz use?

Answer 26

example of geometry book, includes everything we can think off, even a book has a reason why it exists

Question 27

finish the quote by Leibniz "the ultimate reason..." what does it mean?

Answer 27

"the ultimate reason of things must lie in neccessary substance" saying very content being needs a reason to exist , a necessary substance has caused this , can't have nothing without something Leibniz says that all contingent things need a reason to exist, and this reason must be found in a necessary being that exists by necessity.

Question 28

for Leibniz what is a 'necessary substance'

Answer 28

something that exists by its own nature and cannot not exist , without it there would be no principle of sufficient reason

Question 29

name aquinas' three ways in his cosmological argument?

Answer 29

1. unmoved mover 2. uncaused causer 3. contingency

Question 30

explain aquinas' first way in his cosmological argument?

Answer 30

1. unmoved mover - focused on how things changed , grow and move in the world - things stay the same unless force acted upon them - something must set something into motion but this couldn't be an infinite being , must be an UNMOVED MOVER

Question 31

finish the quote by aquinas for the unmoved mover "Nothing can be reduced......"

Answer 31

“Nothing can be reduced from potentiality to actuality , except by something in a state of actuality”

Question 32

explain aquinas' second way In the cosmological argument.

Answer 32

uncaused causer - idea of cause - every effect has a cause - infinite regress is impossible must be a cause that cause is God - the first cause - borrowed Aristotle 'efficient cause' - efficient cause is how something happens ie: baker kneading bread is the efficient cause of bread

Question 33

finish the quote by aquinas for his second way "It is necessary...."

Answer 33

" It is necessary to admit a first efficient cause, to which everyone gives the name of God”

Question 34

explain Aquinas' third way in the cosmological argument

Answer 34

contingency - world consist of contingent beings dependent on something - contingent in two ways 1. dependent on something bringing them into existence 2. depend on outside factors like light - if everything in the universe was contingent nothing would be here - without a divine being nothing would be here as everything is contingent

Question 35

who developed the 'fallacy of composition' and what does it mean?

Answer 35

developed by David Hume means just because there is design within the world , doesn't mean the whole universe needs a designer you cannot guess the universe has a designer just because things within the universe show design

Question 36

what argument , teleo or cosmo, what 'fallacy of composition' used to argue against?

Answer 36

cosmological argument

Question 37

what scholar was used by Hume to develop his argument? what did it argue?

Answer 37

Epicurean thesis there was a possible explanation for design within the world which was at the beginning of time, random particles moved in chaos and motion and overtime evolved into an order system this developed design, not neccessarily by a divine being .

Question 38

what was aquinas' arrow and archer analogy?

Answer 38

an arrow can hit a target even without a mind of its own an archer who has a mind shot the arrow similar to looking at the world natural world reflects the arrow which cannot think the archer = God which causes the natural world to behave in a way in which it does

Question 39

what was 'regularity of succession' ? who proposed this and what analogy was it linked too?

Answer 39

Aquinas - linked to archer and arrow analogy means everything in nature follows certain laws which leads to certain results