What Is The Teleological Argument For The Existence Of God – ‘Challenges to the teleological argument for the existence of God are persuasive.’ Evaluate this view. (30) Introduction: Briefly presents the concepts.

Presentation on theme: “‘Challenges to the Teleological Argument for the Existence of God Are Persuasive.’ Evaluate this view. (30) Introduction: Briefly introduces concepts.”— Presentation transcript:

What Is The Teleological Argument For The Existence Of God

1 “Challenges to the teleological argument for the existence of God are persuasive.” Evaluate this view. (30) Introduction: Briefly presents the concepts and presents the argumentation. In this essay, I will argue that… Toasted marshmallows: Clear and sharp outside Make my argument Sticky middle Evidence, logical chains of inference, scientists Clear and sharp outside Concise mini conclusion / link back to question It could be argued that … This seems to suggest that … In support of this, the *student* stated that… Furthermore, However, Conclusion: It follows from your explanation; concludes your argument. Despite…, it seems undeniable that…

Three Arguments For The Existence Of God

Clear views, supported by detailed reasoning / evidence. views of scientists specialist language and vocabulary n.b. Swinburne – the fact that the universe is so complex means that it is much more likely that it was designed than that this order arose by chance. God is the simplest explanation for this,

3 “Challenges to the teleological argument for the existence of God are persuasive.” Evaluate this view. (30) One challenge to the teleological argument is that natural selection and evolution explain the complexity of species in terms of natural and random processes, rather than being the work of God. Aquinas’ idea of ​​purpose coming from God is therefore no longer relevant: as Dawkins argues, empirical evidence shows us that the DNA of each species explains its ‘purpose’. However, Tennant argues that evolution itself is evidence of divine design and that the complex functioning of the universe as a whole must be the result of intelligence. However, this argument relies on a pre-existing belief in God: the leap of faith is not convincing for atheists. Indeed, Dawkins went so far as to describe the notion of a divine designer as ‘superstitious nonsense’ because there is no empirical evidence. Furthermore, natural selection explains the existence of evil and suffering in the universe: a universe designed by the God of classical theism would contain no such defects. Scientific explanations are therefore a more acceptable alternative to divine ‘intelligent’ design theories because they are evidence-based and successfully overcome the philosophical challenges faced by those who claim that God is a designer.

The design is only apparent. The order that can be seen in space is not evidence of intention. Therefore, there is no need to conclude that it was the action of a designer god, thereby undermining the claims of his existence. The suggestion that this argument is more of a ‘hollow’ God argument rather than based on empirical evidence claims. As such, it is outdated and unnecessary in a rational scientific age. Arguments supporting design from science – e.g. Darwin and his work on natural selection and evolution contradicts the scriptural description of the universe and everything in it as a purposefully designed result of God’s actions. Natural selection explains the problem of evil (ie accidental suffering, animal suffering, etc.) and is therefore a more acceptable alternative to divine ‘intelligent’ design theories, as it is based on empirical evidence rather than theological speculation. Candidates should consider the various counterarguments derived from Hume as accepted as empirically sound (ineffective analogies; lack of experience; apparently inauthentic design; no comparable universe) and thus present a persuasive challenge to the teleological argument. Alternatively, other views may include the fact that the teleological argument is based on the observation of an apparent design, order and purpose in the universe (a posteriori), ie. the scientific method. In that case, the foundations of the argument are based on the same assumptions as the assumptions of scientific theories. Scientific theories often need updating or are shown to be incorrect – so scientific evidence against a teleological argument is not necessarily an effective challenge. Contemporary scholars (eg Tennant) support the concept of design. This shows that scientific evidence can be used to support as well as challenge the teleological argument. In that case, the strength of the argument can be reduced to personal preference, negating the effectiveness of the challenge.

Rate this view. (30 points) Design arguments, sometimes called teleological arguments, from the Greek ‘Telos’ for goal and ‘Logos’, which means reason, thus reasoning for a goal or purpose and that purpose is the existence of God. These arguments seek to establish the existence of God, inferring from evidence of design and purpose in the universe, and asserting that there must have been a designer of this. Design arguments start from experience, so they are a posteriori and use inductive reasoning, as we conclude from a specific observation, a general conclusion. Arguments about design usually point to specific examples in the universe, such as the complexity of the human body, and especially the human eye, as it works coherently to achieve a purpose. Also the position of the Earth in relation to other astronomical factors, such as the perfect position of the Earth in relation to the sun, if it were just a little further or closer to the sun, then human life could not arise and be sustained; The Earth’s climate is therefore too warm or too cold. Also, Jupiter’s position is perfect, as it repels a significant amount of meteorites due to its gigantic magnetic field; moreover, the earth is also in perfect harmony with the moon, as it controls the tides, which allows human life to be sustained. St. Thomas Aquinas’ version of the design argument was first presented in his ‘Summa Theologica’, where he offers a way in which the existence of God can be demonstrated. Aquinas argues that things that lack intelligence, such as a living organism, have a goal or purpose, and without some kind of director to lead them to their goal, possessing intelligence and knowledge. Aquinas famously uses the analogy of the archer, where he says that without the archer, the arrow will not reach its target, but will require something to direct it; hence the archer. Therefore, according to the outcome of the analogy, it is logical that all non-intelligent beings are guided or directed towards their goal by some intelligent being, and of course, the being here is God, who governs all non-intelligent beings, such as humans and all animals. . Aquinas uses some fundamental ideas put forward by the third-century BC philosopher Aristotle, that all organisms in nature have a purpose, for example, ducks are webbed to swim better, although Aristotle claims that this is only a fact of nature, not an indication designer. Upon further inspection of this argument, numerous doubts arise, first of all, it follows from the assumption that everything in the universe has and has a purpose, but what is the purpose of the universe or humans; it is quite unreasonable to compare the target of an arrow with the target of space, the two concepts are completely different, it becomes an inseparable situation for Aquinas here. Also in the archer and arrow situation we can see the archer’s hands directing the arrow towards the target; however, we cannot see these non-intelligent beings controlling anything, as pointed out by Antony Flew. It can be shown that modern scientific developments pose great problems for Aquinas; however, we cannot blame Aquinas for this, as they were discovered long after his death. Another design argument worth mentioning, probably the most famous design argument from analogy, was made by the eighteenth-century English philosopher, William Paley. It is commonly known as the watchmaker’s analogy. Paley says imagine you’re walking across a moor and you discover a stone, but you push it aside because it’s not worth asking where it came from, however you walk on, and you come across a clock, but this time as the object discovered exhibits certain properties, the same answer will not satisfy. For Paley, for all we know, the stone could have lain there forever, but we can’t answer the same question with that answer, because we’ll need something more than that. The stone and the watch consist of contrasting characteristics. A stone is a single piece of material; it seems to serve no purpose or purpose. However, a watch is completely different, it has several parts and these parts seem to work together for a purpose, they enable the object to produce movement, but if these parts were arranged in a different way, no such movement would be produced. According to Paley’s argument, the clock possesses: complexity, harmony, intelligence, and purpose, which is what Paley calls “spatial order,” because everything seems to be in the right place to fulfill a particular purpose. Any object that exhibits such characteristics indicates the existence of a design. Paley then says, as you look at the watch and appreciate its implications for the designer, turn your head and look at the world, and then you will come to the same conclusion. Like you

Existence Of God: Cosmological And Teleological Arguments Free Essay Sample On Samploon.com

Best argument for the existence of god, moral argument for the existence of god, strongest argument for the existence of god, cosmological argument for the existence of god, explain the teleological argument for the existence of god, teleological argument for god, logical argument for the existence of god, teleological argument for god's existence, teleological argument for the existence of god, ontological argument for the existence of god, transcendental argument for the existence of god, argument for existence of god