The Telelogical Argument Flashcards
(10 cards)
Outline Aquinas’ analogy of the archer.
- Everything in the universe has a purpose
- This purpose must come about through some higher power (God)
- Objects can only be aimed towards a goal (their telos) with the guidance of an intelligent being
What is meant by design qua purpose?
The universe has been designed for a specific purpose
Outline the watchmaker analogy.
- If you came across a watch, you would assume it has been designed due to it’s complexity
- We don’t need to see the watch being made and the watch doesn’t need to be perfect to infer design
How does Hume criticise Paley’s analogy?
- The universe is unique. We can’t assume it was designed as there was no one there to witness said design.
- It may prove some powerful being, at best. Why wouldn’t it be the Islamic God?
Why do Charles Darwin and Richard Dawkins reject the telelogical argument?
- Evolution provides the most significant challenge to design. If we were designed perfectly - why do we need to adapt?
- “Paley’s argument is made with passionate sincerity and is informed by the best biological scholarship of the day, but it is wrong, gloriously and utterly wrong” - Dawkins on the watchmaker analogy
- DNA negates the need for God. Christians have failed to adapt to this, making wild claims that the word “Jesus” is embedded into DNA
What alternative did Catholic Cardinal John Henry Newman provide to the telogical argument?
- Evolution can be used as empirical evidence to support God’s existence
- Evolution shows that God’s design is skillful.
- Science and religion are compatible
Why does Newman’s approach fail to provide a credible alternative to the design argument?
He commits a God of the gaps fallacy by claiming God started evolution.
Why do John Stewart Mill & John Mackie provide the most credible challenge to telology?
- The world is not designed to any degree of perfection.
- If the world was designed by God, God is inherently evil.
What did Paley base his teleological argument on?
Observations of the natural world
Why are Paley’s analogies weak and overall not credible?
Comparing man-made objects to the world is non sensical and unfair. Paley is grasping at straws.