3. arguments based on observation

posteriori arguments, facts abt that

inductive

premises mean that the conclusion is likely but not certain

what is posteriori reasoning

uses observation or expoerience to reach conclusions

who provided that ‘governance of the world argument’

aquinus

what is the ‘from the governanc eof the world argument’ /7 points

• bodies which lack knowledge act for a purpose or end

• acting for an end leads to the best result

• not by luck but by design

• anything that lacks knowledge needs something with knowledge to guide it

• like an arrow and an archers to het to its target

  • therefore there is an intelligent being that firects all natural things to their end

hat example did aquinus use in his teleological argument

archer and arrow

how does aquinus reason his teleological argument

looks at the purpose of somehting and from there reasons that a god must exist

aquinus quote summa theoogica on teleological

‘ therefore some intelligent being exists by whom all natural things are directed to their end, and this is the being we call god

problems with arguments from analogy

and one positive

‘ aptness of analogy’

anthropromisation

do they illustrate a point or argue for it

• illustrate complex argument

who suggested design qua purpose and regularity

paley

what is design qua regularity

complex objects work with regularity, like planets orbiting , this order seems to be the result of the work of a deisgner and placed deliberately

well kept garden

what analogy did payley use for design qua regularity

well kept garden

what is design qua purpose

designer fits all teh part of the universe together for some purpose - all parts of the universe work well together llike a perpetual clockw

hat examples did aquinus use for design qua purpose

eye

wings - intricacy to aid with flight

calls

what did arthur brown say

ozone layer is a gift from god allowing life to develop

describe analogy of the watch

• walking in a heath and stumble on a rock, you are able to explain its origins referring to natural causes

• yet if you were to stumble on a watch you wouldnt be able to come up with a natural explaination

• the watch is made up of cogs and springs and so this design couldnt have come about by chance- there must have been a watch maker

  • the world is even more complex therefore a god must have created it

how did paley defend his argument /3

• if we have never seen a watch before or seen it get created it still exists

• watch is broken, enough design

  • even if we do not fully understand the watch

what does aptness of analgy suggest about payley

machine like analogy would mean a machine like god

to what extent is it valid to compare a watch to the world

how deos the cosmilogical argument work

observation about the way the way the universe works and from these tory to explain why the universe exists

liebniz quote for cosmological

‘ why is there something rather than nothing’

what is the pricniple of sufficient reason

‘ why is there something other than nothing’

no fact could ever be true unless there was a sufficient reason why it was

what is a metaphysical necessity

only thing that can offer a sufficient reason is something extra mundane w

hat is the first way

• every thing in a state of actually and potentiality

• a;; things that are moved are moved by something else

• pterptual state of changing from potentiality to actuallity caused by something else

• there cannot be an infinite regress of movememnt

• otherwise there would be no first mover

  • this first mover is god

what is aquinus’ second way

• nothing can be on its own efficient because it cannot have existed before itself

• things that are causes must themselves be caused otherwise the effect would be taken away

• we cannot go back infinitely as there would be no future causes and effects

  • therefore ther emust be a first efficient casue that caused itself wh

what is aquinus’ third way

• everything in this universe is contingent and relies on something else to bring itself into existece

• everything is contingent , could and couldnt have existed

• these things could not always have existed becasue they havent existed at one point and they rely on somehting for their existence

• if we go back to when nothing existed then nothing would have begun to exist as something couldnt have come from nothing

  • there must be a necessary being

problem with necessary beings

• it must have gotten its necessity from somewhere

• however you cannot have an infinite regress of necessity

  • therefore there must be a being that itself is necessary

all oof humes arguments against teleological

1. we do not have sufficient experience of either to draw conclusions

   1. we dont have infomration we may in the future

all of humes arguments against teleological /9

1. not necessarily true that world works like a watch

2. vegatable posses complexity but is also a natural object like the world

3. analogy is anthropromising God

4. team of disgners, team of builders like for a building

5. infant diety ‘ rude essay of an infant deity’

6. other kinds of analogy as world does not necessitate a designer

7. team of designers

8. existence of evil

   1. epicurean

what is teh epicurian hypothesis

given an infinite amount of time chatoic matter will become orderes as all possible combinations of matter will be tried until a stable environment is reached

thus randomness

problems with the God’s nature according to hume

• scales- we may see evidence of a designer due to one side of the scale being heavier than the other

• ship builder - imitated other deisgners, the designer could be immoral , doesnt mena watch maker is a moral being

what did kant say lol

we can only know something by describing it

we can only describe something by experiencing it

what are the critisisms of the cosmological argument according to Hume

fallacy of composition

• assumes that th euniverse is the same as what is in it

  • just becuase there is ausfficient reason for things to exitst in the universe, does not mean that the universe needs an efficient reason to exist

    • inductive leap

what did rusself say about cosmological argument

h- the universe is a brite fact and does not require an explaination as we have already explained it parts

all problems with cosmological

• russel and explaination

• hume and fallacy of compeitions

• self refuting argument

  • why is a god necessary for th euniverse

  • russel;l ‘what caused god’

what is oscillating universe theory

• universe undergoes periods of expansion and contraction

  • therefore it would not need a prime mover

what are all the hume examinations

basically anti hume

• modern science suggests a definite beginning

• we need to have faith to make the final leap - Søren Kierkegaard

• where do the laws by which the universe function come from

• just becuase there isnt experience of something, others experience can explain it

• the creation of the world is a unique event, why wouldnt it be a special case

what book did darwin write

the origin of specisies

what are the darwinian aspects of evolution and how it challange

• inhertience and reproduction

• mutation - different species emerge, and this doesnt happen beucase of a desginer

  • survival of the fittest- those who have muted as best fit for the situation, this was not designed

  • l

• adaptation - removes guiding nature of god

• extiction

• developmetn of time’ not an all at once designer’

• chance and randomness

what did russel say about cosmological

‘ what caused god’

‘if everythign has a casue god must have a cause also’

no ultimate explaination w

who responded to russel saying ‘waht caused god’

william craig

god is a necessary being doesnt need a cause

only certian things need a cause and the universe is a special event

what did did richard dawkins say

‘ blind and unconcious watch maker’

‘ has no purpose in mind’

what is the anthropic principle and who

FR tennant

• conditions of the universe are perfect for life to develop on it

• god is responsible for this perfect balance like the air

• the world has basics to sustain life

  • and therefore evolution is destined for the emergence of intelligent life

what is the aesthetic pricniple

the ability to recognise beuty is not something that could have come about by evolutioon, as there is no evolutionary advantage to it

• not necessarily true AT ALL w

what is the fine tuning argument

specific and exact right way

what are the logical fallacies

assumption - based on assumption that this shit has a purpose

jump to transcendent creator

why couldnt the universe be said ‘special case’ rather than god