Aquinas Teleological Argument

Telos Meaning

‘End’ or ‘Purpose’

Telelogical Argument

1. Also known as the design argument.

2. Based on observations of apparent order, design and purpose.

Premise 1: Complexity of the universe shows evidence of design.

Premise 2: Such design implies a designer.

Conclusion: The designer of the universe is a universal G-d.

Maimonides on Teleological Argument

“The universe is not empty; we can at least be sure that things we perceive with our senses exist.

We can explain the existence of these things in one of three ways

(1) All things are eternal and exist necessarily. (2) Nothing is eternal and exists necessarily. (3) Some things are eternal and exist necessarily, some things not.”

1. Maimonides says that the first one is wrong, as we see things come into existence one moment and perish in another.

2. The second is wrong as if nothing were permanent, it is conceivable that everything might perish and nothing will take its place.

3. Therefore, a necessary being must exist as the third one is correct.

Natural Theology

Seeks to understand the existence and nature of G-d through looking at the things we can observe in the world around us.

Aquinas’ Fifth Way

1. Things that lack knowledge, such as ‘natural bodies’ work/move towards a goal.

2. However, this cannot occur unless it is directed by something intelligent e.g. an arrow by an archer.

3. We call this intelligent being G-d.

Link to Aristotle’s Four Causes

1. Everything has a final cause (purpose).

2. Purpose in the universe comes directly from G-d.

Criticisms of Aquinas’ Teleological Argument

1. Confuses the idea of a natural cycle with reaching an end goal, natural things don’t work towards a goal, they are just following a natural cycle, e.g. water cycle.

2. Doesn’t assign any attributes to G-d, Aquinas even says ‘We call this being G-d’. Similar to Maimonides criticism, who says that it “does not lead to the establishment of the Law and the principles of Religion”

3. Modern biology says that not everything has a purpose. Purpose implies a mental state and inanimate objects don’t have a mental state. In the arrow example, the arrow doesn’t have a purpose at all - the archer has a purpose for it.

4. Not everything has a good purpose. E.g. design of a bed of nettles next to dock leaves. Dock leaves are the antidote to nettles, so this appears to have purpose. But what is the purpose of the nettles?