Teleo arguments

Hume

The use of analogy is weak and remote

1) Our experience may show us that apparent design in the world can be explained by a a designer. For example, a machine appears designed because it has a designer. A house appears designed because it has a designer.

Some people will argue that the world is like a complex machine, and so must have a designer, but this use of analogy is weak and remote.

• There are not enough similarities between a machine and the universe to make a strong analogy. In fact, the universe may seem more like an organic structure than a machine.

• Our universe is a ‘unique case’ - we cannot draw any analogies to compare it to anything else accurately.

Apparent design does not mean there has to be a designer

2) Hume suggests it is a fallacy (false reasoning) to assume that just because something appears designed, it is actually designed.

If there is finite matter, and infinite time, then every single arrangement of matter will occur at some point. The order of the universe can be equally explained by chance as by a designer.

^^ The Epicurean hypothesis

Even if we assume there is a designer, that need not be the God of classical theism

3) As our experience of the universe is of a unique case we cannot gauge if the universe is well designed, and so cannot infer anything about whether the designer was a ‘good designer’ or not. There are lots of parts of the universe that may not be considered well designed, e.g. vast emptiness and poor design like tectonic plates.

^^ Dysteleology - poor design

4) The apprentice God - in many ways the design of our would may appear “botched and bungled”

Plurality of gods - is use analogy of human designers then may equally infer a group of designers

Absent God - made the world and moved on