The dissimilarities between the universe and a human-crafted machine are too great to draw the conclusion that Cleanthes seeks. In the parts reproduced here, Cleanthes (the natural theologian) states the argument and asserts, “By this argument a posteriori, and by this argument alone, do we prove at once the existence of a Deity and his similarity to human mind and intelligence.” Philo replies that the argument rests on an extremely weak analogy from which we can derive no more than a guess about a deity. In this famous dialogue, Philo (who reflects Hume’s views on the subject) gives us the classic critique of the argument from design. Likewise, when we see the intricate works of nature exhibiting all the marks of purposefulness in their design, we must conclude that the world, too, had an intelligent designer. Arguing by analogy, he says that anyone who comes upon a mechanical watch would infer from the watch’s apparent purposefulness that it must have been made by an intelligent designer. In this reading Paley offers his famous argument from design for the existence of God. He maintains that such an infinity is impossible because notions about an actual infinity of things involve logical absurdities. Ĭraig regards premise 1 as “intuitively obvious.” To support premise 2, he contends that the universe had to begin to exist because the alternative is an infinite number of past events, which is impossible. In this selection, Craig puts forth the Kalām cosmological argument, drawing inspiration from scientific evidence suggesting that the universe came into being about 15 billion years ago in a cosmic “Big Bang.” He states the argument like this:ģ. The only sufficient explanation is that there is a divine designer who planned such harmony. The final argument is from the harmony of things: There is a harmony of nature that calls for an explanation. The fourth argument is from excellence, and it argues that because there are degrees of excellence, there must be a perfect being from whence come all excellences. The third argument is from contingency and argues that because there are dependent beings (for example, humans), there must be an independent or necessary being on whom the dependent beings rely for their subsistence. The second argument is from causation and argues that there must be a first cause to explain the existence of cause. The first argument begins with the fact that there is change and argues that there must be an Unmoved Mover that originates all change (or motion) but is itself unmoved. In this reading Aquinas presents his five a posteriori arguments for the existence of God. Aquinas : Summa Theologica (the “Five Ways”)
0 kommentar(er)
