Teleological Argument
- Created by: Tom Kydd-Coutts
- Created on: 19-04-14 13:55
View mindmap
- Teleological Argument
- William Paley
- Design Qua purpose
- Design Qua Regularity
- The is evidence of a designer due to apparent order in the world
- The relationships between things in the world is so precise e.g Earth's atmosphere (Goldilocks belt) that it is irrational to assume there is not an intelligent designer behind it's creation
- The is evidence of a designer due to apparent order in the world
- Criticisms
- Hume
- Using Paley's logic, why is it not possible to consider multiple, lesser designers-coincides with Paganism at the time before Darwin
- To speak of God as a designer is to put Him into a superhuman and anthropomorphic sense which does not correlate to the idea of perfection
- He does however agree that great design does imply a great designer
- But our world is full of animals and nature that are "insufficient all of them for their own happiness"
- Our God is therefore vindictive and cruel
- J.S Mill: "Either there is no God or there exists and incompetent or immoral God"
- Our God is therefore vindictive and cruel
- But our world is full of animals and nature that are "insufficient all of them for their own happiness"
- He does however agree that great design does imply a great designer
- Darwin
- This regularity seen in the world and purpose in everything is down to evolution and billions of years of natural selection until everything looked so perfect it appears ordered.
- Hume
- William Paley
Comments
No comments have yet been made