Of the three main styles of arguments for the existence of God – the cosmological, the teleological, and the ontological – the teleological is probably the second strongest of these arguments. The teleological argument is also the only one of these arguments that reasons to its conclusion inductively. This means that, unlike the cosmological and ontological arguments, the acceptance of the premises of the teleological argument does not commit you to the acceptance of its conclusion. It only commits you to a judgement about the probability of the conclusion. The style of reasoning typically adopted by this method is one that starts from a posteriori observations about our reality, and then reasons a priori – typically through analogy – to the …show more content…
When laid out, the teleological argument is this: there exists a phenomenon of certain regularities of succession in the universe – such as the natural laws. The best explanation for the existence of this regularities is that they were created by a free and intelligent agent (P.104). The sub-argument that is supporting this is that we observe other regularities of succession in which we know the cause to be human (P.104). The natural regularities are similar to those that we observe to be caused by humans; thus, the cause of these regularities is probably similar to human cause – in that it is caused by a free intelligent agent (P.104). There are many criteria used to determine the strength of these two types of inductive arguments, and I am going to analyze each of these criteria to try and show the weaknesses in the argument. The criteria we are going to be looking at for the analogical argument is relevant similarities, relevant dissimilarities, number of instances compared, and diversity among cases. While determining the strength of the inference to the best explanation I will be looking at consistency, testability, fruitfulness, scope and
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
Analogous argument sets up a direct comparison between two things in order to prove a certain thesis. Abductive explanation uses its conclusion to explain its thesis. Authors may use cause and effect strategy to strengthen a claim by proving that there is a direct link between one thing and another.
I Thesis The Teleological Argument presented by William Paley is not a good nor a sound argument due to Paley’s use of the word ‘generally’ in premise three as well as his failure to establish a God, in all aspects of the word, existence. I now will explain each premise of the Teleological Argument and all of its premise’s in Section II, then in Section III explain why I believe this argument fails and is unsound. II
The Design Argument The question of whether God truly exists has been debated between believers and non-believers for centuries. Also known as the Teleological Argument, the Design Argument argued by William Paley states that there are so many intricate details and designs in our world that there must be a creator. In addition, it also argues that this world could not have been created by chance alone due to the characteristics that make it the perfect condition for human life to exist (Pecorino). In this essay, I will be giving a brief overview of what the Design Argument is, then providing evidence and reasoning in favor of the argument, then addressing the criticisms of the argument, then comparing both sides of the argument, then finally
St. Thomas Aquinas wrote five arguments for the existence of God, part of his Summa Theologiae. Thomas’ second argument for the existence of God is one of the most compelling, as we can see examples from both the Bible and nature to support it. In the cause and effect argument, Thomas starts off with providing reason that all things that exist in the world must have an original cause to all the effects we see on earth. Thomas states, “There is no case known in which a thing is found to be the efficient cause of itself” (Summa Theologiae I 2:3).Thomas is proving that nothing in nature exists without having a cause, and therefore it is impossible for something to exist in nature without something, the effect, prior to it causing it to exist. The bird, the effect, that flies around your backyard was created by two prior birds, the cause, before that one, and you can keep tracing the cause of each bird back far enough when
Personally, I believe the conclusion of the transcendental argument for the existence of God. In my opinion, Immanuel Kant is more credible because he created the argument and supported it using many examples, whereas Michael Martin only found errors with the TAG. I agree with Kant because this theory is a cause and effect, meaning that God’s existence caused human reason. In Critique of Pure Reason, Kant states that logic originates from an individual’s belief in God. If someone believes that God created the world, then He is the reason why the laws of logic exist.
Arguing for the existence of God from a philosophical perspective would need a more solidifying use of reason instead of evidence based logic. Because when trying to qualify your main thesis within an argument using evidence based logic and reasoning would aid in establishing credibility with your audience. So in Pascal's "The Wager" it utilizes argument theory of deductive reasoning. Deductive reasoning or theory is similar to cause and effect inference, an example could be if you drop a ball it will hit the ground. However deductive theory validates the end result through the consequence of the action.
The traditional claim of all Cosmological Arguments is defined as “something outside the universe is responsible to explain the existence of the universe” (PowerPoint 380). In the “causal argument,” or the First Cause Argument on the cosmological argument, “something” outside of the universe that is supposed to inform us about the existence of the universe is argued to be explained as God. As the first cause argument goes into depth and with the help of Thomas Aquinas, it is easy to see how God is responsible for explaining the existence of the universe around us. Within the first cause argument on the cosmological argument the following premises and conclusions are discussed: Premise 1: There exists things that are caused. Meaning that
There have been an innumerable amount of arguments for the existence of God for hundreds of years. Some have become much more popular due to their merit, and their ability to stay relevant through changing times. Two arguments in particular that have been discussed for a very long time are the ontological and cosmological arguments. Each were proposed in the period of the high middle ages by members of the Roman Catholic Church. They each have been used extensively by many since their introduction.
To understand the Basic Argument and prove its validity, I’d like to break it down into 3 steps. Firstly, Strawson argues that we do what we do because of the way we are. Meaning that our actions are determined by the characteristics, personalities etc. that we have as people.
St. Anselm and Descartes are known for presenting the first ontological arguments on the existence of God. The word ontological is a compound word derived from ‘ont’ which means exists or being and ‘–ology’ which means the study of. Even though Anselm and Descartes’ arguments differ slightly, they both stem from the same reasoning. Unlike the other two arguments on God’s existence (teleological and cosmological), the ontological argument does not seek to use any empirical evidence but rather concentrates on pure reason. The rationale behind this school of thought
The early, active, bright, busy happy universe is already losing steam, you see, it isn’t the sort of thing to keep popping and growing as a poet or author of sentiments would hope. Unfortunately, this universe is a friend of decadence, and as the chronometers go on, so too will the expanse of space the universe occupies, but the relatively finite amount of energy will become so thinly spread that nothing will be anything but the darkest, the darkest nothing, for billions of miles, hundreds of light years, thousands of light years, eventually you could walk the distance of the existent universe from one corner to the other without seeing a single spark because it’s all gone. THE UNIVERSE IS DECADENT This inevitable de-cadence to nihilism
Such proofs include teleological and ontological. A proof is an unquestionable, factual statement that directs an argument to the final product and is based on a level of scientific factualness. The existence of the world is no guarantee for believing in the existence of a certain being (God). The cosmological and design only offer points and arguments towards the existence of God, but the
INTRODUCTION Analogical reasoning is a core of cognition. It is a skill to see the similarities between objects or ideas. The existing knowledge or the prior knowledge of an object or idea is used to explain or understanding the new idea. It allows students to combine two basic reasoning skills of categorization and generalization to cope with new information more effectively. Analogical reasoning involves two components, which are, the source and the target.