|
Strengths
- The argument is inductive and follows strict philosophical logic.
- The argument is cumulative, which means it only gets stronger once people begin to investigate it.
- Compliments the claims made within revealed theology (that God shows himself in revealed ways
- Compliments the notion of the god of classical theism
- Provides an answer to existential questions.
- Combines the strength of scientific knowledge and religion.
|
Weaknesses
- Inductive argument can never establish proof, they can only establish probability.
- The argument rests on an inductive leap- just because there is evidence of design this does not mean God designed it.
- The existence of God can never be proved
- The argument would not convert an non-believer.
- (in response to Tennant's aesthetic principle) Beauty can be explained in evolutionary terms, for example a Peacock's feathers need to be bright in order to attract a mate.
|
|
Opportunities
- Plato- put forward the first design argument.
- Cicero- 'what can be more clear or obvious when we look up to the sky and contemplate the heavens than there is some divinity or intelligence'.
- Thomas Aquinas- in the 13th Century wrote his book 'summa theologica', which contained the theory of the fifth way. It said that all living objects have a purpose and a goal, which they must be directed towards. The end goals must have been set by a designer, that designer being God. He used the analogy of an arrow (living objects moving towards their goals) and an archer (God)
- William Paley- wrote the watch analogy. The order, complexity and beauty in a watch would suggest that it had been designed by a watchmaker. The order, complexity and beauty in the world, therefore, would also suggest it had been designed- this time by God. He also put forward 'Design qua purpose'- that some objects do not have a purpose but are put there simply to be beautiful, so they must be designed- and 'Design qua regularity'- that the world is too complex and uniform to be down to random chance.
- F.R Tennant: aesthetic and anthropic argument- Aesthetic is that beauty exists in the world, despite the fact it is not essential for evolution. Beauty therefore requires a designer- God. Anthropic principle (also 'Goldilocks principle') is that the world is so perfect for human life that it could not be an accident. The exact conditions for human life are so improbable that someone must have designed the world exactly to meet our needs.
- Richard Swinburne- agreed with Tennant and said that design was the simplest answer, so therefore the best.
|
Threats
- Darwin and evolution- species do not arise out of a divine plan, they are a result of natural selection. This contradicts Aquinas' fifth way that all objects are directed, because they are actually just mutating.
- David Hume- In 'Dialogues concerning natural religion' said we have no experience of world-making so cannot draw analogies such as Paleys' watch. The available evidence cannot prove the God of classical theism.
- Richard Dawkins- wrote 'the Blind Watchmaker' in response to Paley in 1986. He accepted Darwin's theory of evolution and said that if the world had been designed, it must have been designed by someone with not insight, as it contains suffering and evil.
- Martin Rees- multiverse theory (or suit shop analogy)- there are many universes, so it is only natural that one would support life- if there are 7 billion universes, and the chances of a world supporting human life are seven billion to one, then of course one will get lucky, this does not show evidence of design. Also backed up by Dawkins, who used the analogy of a card shuffling machine- the cards we get are simply by chance, much the same as a world supportive of life is chance.
- Mark Twain- Man overestimates his own importance. The world was not created to support humans, we just survive here out of random chance.
- JS Mill and Peter Vardy- Mills argues that the world has suffering and ugliness, so any god that created beauty and order also made the reverse. Vardy said that there is no such thing as beauty, it is a culturally conditioned perception.
|
Comments
Report
Report