The Design Argument
The Design/Teleological Argument in the forms of an analogical argument and anthropic principle, as well as criticisms from: Charles Darwin, John Stuart Mill, David Hume and Immanuel Kant, and also counter criticisms.
- Created by: LottieAli
- Created on: 29-04-14 19:23
View mindmap
- The Design Argument
- Anthropic Principle
- Doesn't present God in an anthropomorphic light.
- Scientific chances of life developing on earth were millions to one.
- Human intelligibility must reflect the intelligibility of our creator.
- Tennant supports: "Nature is meaningless and valueless without God behind it."
- At the start of the Big Bang, fluctuations occurred, forming stars and galaxies. These fluctuations were the fine tuning of potential happenings.
- This shows a cumulative nature of design.
- Although the universe was billions of years old before life appeared on it, it was 'pregnant with possibility from the beginning.'
- The universe is not too flexible, or too fixed, allowing for evolution to occur.
- Analogical Argument
- The formation of a watch or the universe is too intricate for either not to have a designer.
- Both have order, purpose and regularity, They have been 'formed and adjusted' to create motion.
- On the other hand, a 'stone on a heath' does not.
- The universe has order - it is impossible to have order without design.
- Although we may not be able to comprehend the design process of a watch, or the universe, this does not deny a creator.
- Darwin's criticism
- He agreed with Paley that the universe has order, but disagreed that this automatically also assumes design.
- Evolution has caused animals and plants to develop over years through Natural Selection.
- This means that at the beginning of species' existence, animals and plants had simple molecular forms that have evolved over time to their now complex states.
- COUNTER CRITICISM: Tennant argues that evolution is consistent with design arguments as even evolution has a purpose: survival of the fittest.
- Mill's criticism
- Accuses nature of criminality. Nature's 'crimes' rule out order.
- Therefore, design must also be ruled out.
- There is more suffering than good in the world, so the creator must have wanted to inflict misery.
- God cannot be omnibenevolent and therefore cannot be the classical concept of God.
- COUNTER CRITICISM: It is ridiculous to accuse nature of crime.
- COUNTER CRITICISM: It is debatable whether there is more suffering than good, especially when we cannot define what 'good' means.
- Accuses nature of criminality. Nature's 'crimes' rule out order.
- Hume's criticism
- Although design arguments convincingly suggest a designer, this does not mean that the creator was God.
- Just because there are examples of order in the universe, this does not mean that the whole universe is ordered.
- If there is a designer, then who designed the designer? Could there be multiple designers?
- The Epicurean Hypothesis supports.
- The universe is made up of particles that move in random motion, only natural forces can order these particles.
- Chance is more likely than a designer.
- The universe is made up of particles that move in random motion, only natural forces can order these particles.
- Kant's criticism
- Order of the universe does not have to be independent of the human mind
- Humans may have created order as a mindset to order experiences, creating a clearer understanding of the world.
- COUNTER CRITICISM: We cannot compare how we perceive order to a reality that we have no experience of.
- COUNTER CRITICISM: Stating that there is no order is actually inflicting order.
- COUNTER CRITICISM: We don't give items order, we discover order e.g. "A cell has a nucleus."
- Anthropic Principle
Comments
No comments have yet been made