The argument from Analogy

Hume argues that the natural world is 'like' synthetic machines in the way it displays purpose.

For example, the arrangements of the eye to see, or the heart to pump blood are designed to fulfill their purpose, much like a clock to tell the time, or a car for mobility.

Consequently, nature must have similar 'causes' to synthetic machines. Machines have intelligent designers, therefore, the natural world must also have an intelligent designer. This must be God.

?
  • Created by: Benjamin
  • Created on: 10-05-13 15:50

The argument from Analogy

Advantages

  • The analogy appeals to our common-sense on the outset.

Disadvantages

  • However, Hume argues that an analogous link between machines and the universe is fallible. For example, cars are a typical example of something designed and built by humans, but living creatures aren't like cars. For example, cars dot reproduce and aren't alive. Consequently, the 'effects' cars-living creatures aren't all that similar, we we can't infer a similar 'cause' i.e. intelligent designer.
  • If the analogy does work, any inference is dubious. Humans are a young species living on a small planet in one of billions of galaxies. We cannot generalise from our own finite existence about the whole universe. It would be the same as a bee generalising about the entire planet earth from his small beehive.
  • Hume argues there are better alternatives, for example, if the universe is infinite, it is possible that molecules come together in all manner of combinations, creating life. This isn't a good alternative because with the benefit of hindsight, we know that molecules only combine according to natural laws.
  • Hume argues that it is one thing inferring an intelligent designer, but quite another to infer this designer to be God. In the human case the designer is not always the creator. For example, someone who designs a car may not have built it, so we cant infer that the designer of the universe also built it. But God is said to have created the universe; this doesn't mean he designed it.
  • The quality of the design is reflected upon the ability of the designer. For example, we would be able to tell a good clockmaker from a poor one, from their product. We can infer that the purpose of the Universe was to sustain life, but there is evidence in the universe of poor design. For example, earthquakes and floods that wipe out life. Therefore, we can infer that the designer of this universe was poor, and made mistakes. But god is said to be infallible.
  • Likewise, the scale of the design is reflected upon the power of the designer. Clocks are finite as are their designers. The universe is also finite, so we can infer that the designer is also finite. However God is said to be infinite, so this should be reflected within the world.

Evaluation

At first glance, Hume's Inductive argument appears to make sense. However, upon further reflection we see that Hume's argument from analogy is severely flawed as both the analogous link and the inferences we make from such a link are fallible. 

Comments

No comments have yet been made