The Teleological Argument

THE TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT:- also known as the design argument.

a posteriri - it looks at the world around us for evidance.

The argument is by ST THOMAS AQUINAS.

This is based on the 5th of Aquinas' 5 ways. The argument of intelligent design. 

The argument states that the universe and nature are so particular that there must be an intelligent disigner that carfully constructed the world to act in such a way. The designer is God.

Aquinas used the Analogy of the Arrow to help us understand his argument:

He claimed that the arrow cannot reach its target without being directed by an archer, this archer is God as it explains why he created the world in such a way in order for us humans to reach our Telos (end/purpose) 

Target: Telos, Arrow: Us, Archer:God

FOR

QUA PURPOSE: Photosynthesis: we breath because of the presence of plants and photosynthesis. Without this we would not breath, it so happens they make oxygen for us to breath.

QUA REGULARITY: Seasons: each season happens at a particular time of year, each year, every year. There are only four, each happen. 

William Pailey, author of the Natural Theology which contains his version of the Teleological argument as he was a known believer of it. Design Qua Purpose & Qua Regularity were devised by him. 

The Analogy of the watch: Qua Purpose.

A man walks across a heath and finds a rock, the existence of the rock is due to nature. He walks further and trips over a watch. He looks at the watch and its intricate design. He concludes due to its complexity it must have been made by a watch maker.

FOR

The watch: the universe, the watchmaker: God.

William Pailey also uses the analogy of the eye, the eye has a purpose to see and for the pupils to only take in the amount of light provided - the designer of this must have been God.

Arthur Brown: Ozone Layer is also a proof of intricate and specific design which must have been created by God. 

Anthropic Principle: Frederick R. Tennant.

He believed the best evidence of design can be seen in the way the universe supports intelligent life. He developed the ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE including the AESTHETIC PRINCIPLE (how it looks) He said: Darwins evolution cannot prove why Humans feel Love and appreciate higher pleasures. Because they do not aid us in survival, Natural Selection does not give us these traits - So why do we have them? Our designer put them there - God!

FOR

Richard Swinburne accepts Frederick Tennants ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE.

He uses a FINE TUNING argument. The earth is too finely tuned to be like this on its own. Science CAN explain this for example - Genetic Mutations working in the earths favour. However, it can never explain why, Why do genetic mutations happen? Etc. Which is the question we are trying to answer. The reason of Science is GOD. 

OCKHAMS RAZOR - SIMPLIST IS BEST. 

The existence of God is the simplist and best answer to this and so God MUST exist. 

AGAINST

David Hume wrote of two fictional characters to display his views. Cleanthes and Philo. It goes as follows:

Cleanthes: The eye is so intricate it must have been designed and created by the God of classical theism (Omnipotent, Omnipresent, Benevolent, Omniscient) - Analogy of a House (house = universe, builders = god) 

Philo: To use an analogy properly you must use things which are similar to one another. You cannot compare the God of classical Theism to a builder or the universe to a house because this enhances the fact that God is more human like and cannot cope with a task this big on his own. We should consider a number of Gods building the Universe like a number of builders build a house. 

Philo (Hume) also agrees in pre-darwin theorys such as natural selection which came 100 years later. He also believes that Gods power could come from his abdomen rather than brain! Like a spider spinning web! 

AGAINST:

HUME: The existance of evil undermines the likelihood of a loving God. The design argument doesnt direct us toward the possibility of a God of classical theism but a designer. This suggests that lesser Gods could have designed the world. Hume liked the...

EPICURIAN HYPOTHESIS: the universe was chaotic but natural forces calmed it down. Mistakingly giving us the illusion of design.

KANT: rejects design arguments. Humans naturally order their own experiences. The world may be chaos but we do not know. We are blind to it. We cannot see noumena only phenomena. The existance of God can only be proven through our innate moral law. 

AGAINST

John Stuart Mill is a UTILTARIAN. 

The presence of evil explains why God does not exist and that if he does he is certainly not the God explained in classical Theism as he is not all loving. Nature is much crueller than the human mind. 

The design in nature - only proves to us that the designer is cruel and not all loving or there is no designer at all.

QUOTE: THE ORDER OF THINGS IN THIS LIFE IS OFTEN AN EXAMPLE OF INJUSTICE NOT JUSTICE. - J.S.MILL: NATURE AND UTILITY OF RELIGION.