Download Document

AS Philosophy
God and the world
Analogy – arguments and criticisms
stox apl 12
Aquinas’ argument from analogy
Aquinas, in Summa Theologica Aquinas offers 5
ways to demonstrate God’s existence.
Three are cosmological arguments, 1 is morality
and the 5th is an argument from design
1) things that lack intelligence, such as living
organisms, have an end (a purpose)
2) things that lack intelligence cannot move
towards their end unless they are directed by
someone with knowledge and intelligence
3) e.g. an arrow does not itself move towards in
target, but needs an archer to direct it
4) conclusion – therefore – by analogy there must
be some intelligent being which directs all
unintelligent natural things toward their end. This
being we call God.
stox apl 12
Intelligent objects
can only reach a
goal with the help
of guiding
intelligence
Aquinas/Aristotle
• Aquinas was a big fan of Aristotle
• This argument makes use of Aristotle’s belief
that everything has a purpose. He notes that
ducks have webbed feet to help them swim
better – just a fact about the nature of things.
• However Aquinas rejects that the webbed feet
have come about naturally – there must be a
reason why ducks ended up with such an
efficient paddling mechanism – someone
intelligent designed it.
• Aquinas uses the archer example ‘similarly
philosophers call every work of nature the work
of intelligence’. And uses the archer analogy for
the whole universe
stox apl 12
Criticisms of Aquinas
• Aquinas’s argument is controversial because it nearly assumes what
the argument sets out to prove – namely there is an intelligent
being who created the universe. If argument is to succeed needs
further evidence – e.g. reasons for believing a) all organisms and
living things have a function and b) functions must be a result of
actions of intelligent being. Aquinas doesn’t give us these.
• Flew points out that suggestion that natural organisms have been
designed seems to go against evidence. Clear when archer/arrow;
architect/house but what about acorns, ducklings, embryos? And so
the claim that some intelligent hand shaped the natural world
simply isn’t supported by our observations.
• Since the time of Aquinas, scientists like Copernicus, Galileo,
Newton’s discoveries have changed the way we view the universe –
some think these undermine traditional church teaching – others
use the new science as evidence that the universe is a glorious
work of divine craftsmanship.
stox apl 12
Experimenting with ideas
What’s in the mystery box – how can we tell if it’s been
designed?
1
2
3
4
5
1) Which of the objects in boxes 1-4 would have been designed?
2) What do the designed objects have in common?
3) List all the thins you would be looking for in the e5th object, in order to determine
whether it’s been designed
stox apl 12
stox apl 12
Archdeacon William Paley (1743-1805)
1) A watch has certain complex features - e.g. parts, each
of which has a function and they work together for a
specific purpose
2) Anything which exhibits these features must have
been designed
3) From 1 & 2 therefore the watch has been designed by
a designer
4) The universe is like the watch in that is possesses the
same features except on a far more wondrous scale
5) From 2 & 4 therefore the universe, like the watch has
been designed except by a wondrous designer - God
stox apl 12
stox apl 12
Paley’s response to criticisms
• Paley anticipates some
criticisms –
A) We may be in ignorance
about how watches are
made
B) The watch may sometimes
go wrong
C) Some parts of the watch
may appear to have no
purpose
D) The watch might have
come together by chance
• When Paley rejects the
stone as seeming to have no
purpose – Paley’s response
to criticism C is that we may
not yet understand what
the purpose of that part is,
and may never do so. We
may need to view the whole
before we can see where it
fits in.
stox apl 12
Hume’s criticism of Paley
Remember Hume was an empiricist –believed all justifiable
beliefs come from observation and experience.
1) We have no experience of world making – so we cannot
reasonably claim to know whether our universe has been
made (Paley’s response – does one man in a million know
how oval frames are turned – no – then how is it we are
nevertheless certain they have been designed?)
However Hume’s point is not satisfied – he askes if by
observing the growth of a hair, can we learn anything about
the generation of a man? Hume concludes that if we have
no experience of this universe being designed, we cannot
compare it to other universes which have been designed,
then we cannot conclude it has been designed, by God or
anyone else.
Further reading – see Dialogues concerning natural religion
stox apl 12
1779 30yrs before Paley – Philo(Hume) Cleantheas & Demea
Hume’s criticism 2
Arguments from analogy are weak – only
works when the items being compared
have lots of similarities – e.g. thumb,
hammer, pain. I guess you feel pain like I
do but it’s impossible to know – so I
conclude you do because we both share
human physiology
Hume argues ‘universe in not like machine
– more organic like an animal or vegetable
that a watch or knitting loom’. Hume
suggests the universe is like a vegetable
and simply grows – but this is flawed
argument, and shows that Paley’s (and
Cleanthes’) teleological arguments cannot
conclude on the basis of an analogy that
the universe has a designer
stox apl 12
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Hume’s criticism 3)
The argument does not demonstrate the existence of God. Paley (and Cleanthes) state:1) machines and the universe exhibit similar features of design (effects) therefore they have been
designed by an intelligent being – but they don’t examine in detail how far the likeness of cause
extends, and moves swiftly onto the conclusion it was God who designed it. Which leaves them
open to criticism from Hume (through Philo)
A) complex machines are not usually the work of one designer – usually a team - therefore could
have been created by many deities not just one God
B) if we anthropomorphise the argument – we might say complex machines could be designed by
foolish and morally weak people – therefore Gods who made universe might be foolish and morally
weak. Likewise humans involved in manufacture are both male and female – so perhaps the deities
are gendered?
C) in design, many attempts, trial and error, perhaps our universe is the produce of a long line of
drat universe – “many worlds before this have been botched and bungled” (Philo) – maybe we’ll be
superseded in future?
D) design faults – e.g. needless pain and suffering could have been caused by a God who lacked
power, skill or love – Philo says ‘most reasonable conclusions of this argument is that “the designer
has more regard for good above ill that to heat above cold or drought above moisture” – a long way
from the loving God envisaged by Paley (and Cleanthes)
HOWEVER this last argument is not necessarily fatal to the teleological argument – Paley agues that
the machine doesn’t need to be perfect – just must show some purpose
Also we can say little about the designer just on the basis of the teleological argument – we just
claim he exists, now what he is like
Robert Hambourger – a modern supporter of teleological arguments states that if we concede that
the universe exhibits elements of design – even if other parts are flawed – it’s enough to show
there’s something seriously wrong with the atheist’s argument
stox apl 12
A little bit about peppered moths
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
In the early 19th century the peppered moth was known as a
predominantly white moth speckled with black.
It’s a rather ordinary creature flying at night and hiding during
the day on twigs and tree trunks where it uses its colouring to
good effect camouflaging itself against the lichen covered tree
bark.
Back in 1848, as the ‘dark satanic mills’ of the industrial
revolution started to cover swathes of the North of England
with dark soot, a black version of the moth was discovered .
Within only 50 years the peppered moth population changed. In
1895 95% of the Mancunian moths were found to be black.
It was suggested that the prevalence of the dark form of the
moth was due to the fact that it escaped being eaten by birds
because it was better camouflaged on the dark sooty surfaces
than the lighter variant.
In 1956 Parliament passed the clean air act.
Within a few years, the black peppered moths began to decline
and the white variety increased.
This is an example of the mechanism that drives evolution. It’s a
story involving things we are familiar with: vision and predation
and birds and moths and pollution and camouflage and lunch
and death.
stox apl 12
The challenge of Darwin – natural
selection
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Darwin’s origin of the species – natural selection for characteristics that allow
species to survive, as offspring have more generations so species adapts to
environment – gives us an alternative to the design argument
It seems obvious that the beauty of a peacock’s tail or the intricacy of the
human eye have been designed – Darwin’s Origin of the Species provides an
account of how such perfectly adapted features could and did come about, not
by intelligent design, but by the struggle of every generation of species to
complete, survive and reproduce.
Darwin’s theory of evolution became widely accepted as the best explanation
of the features that William Paley puzzled over, namely that:Living organisms consist of individual parts
These parts are framed and work together for a purpose
They have been made with specific material, appropriate to their action
Together they produce regulated motion
If the parts had been different in any way such motion would not be produced
stox apl 12
Conclusion
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Darwin’s account – random mutation plus the pressures of natural election is the designer of all living
organisms – it is not an intelligent or purposeful designer, but a blind unthinking mechanism
But this didn’t extinguish teleological arguments – e.g. Richard Swinbourne assimilates evolution into
machine making’ nature of mechanical universe
So the features of natural design – although not directly caused by God (as suggested by Paley) are still
the result of evolutionary mechanism built into the universe by God.
So teleological arguments are robust in the face of arguments from naturalism despite modern physics
and biology in explaining the apparent and purpose of the universe.
Recent arguments have moved away from the simplistic analogy but instead argue that naturalistic
arguments are inadequate and that Go is the best
Hypothesis explaining why the world is the way it is. These more modern arguments for design
include:Arguments for Intelligent Design – which draw on the principle of ‘irreducible complexity’ as a
response to the theory of evolution
Arguments to the best explanation – which use the method of abduction, to propose God as a
hypothesis that best accounts for all the features of the universe
Arguments responding to the ANTHROPOIC PRINCIPLE which assess the likelihood of two possibilities;
first the probability of the universe being the way it is (and of conscious beings coming into existence)
through chance secondly, the probably of the universe being as it is by design.
stox apl 12
Wm Paley’s intelligent contrivance
• Rectus muscles:
2 = superior, 3 = inferior, 4 =
medial, 5 = lateral
Oblique muscles: 6 = superior,
8 = inferior
Other muscle: 9 = levator
palpebrae superioris
Other structures: 1 = Annulus
of Zinn, 7 = Trochlea, 10 =
Superior tarsus, 11 = Sclera, 12
= Optic nerve
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T
rochlea_of_superior_oblique
• http://phylogenous.wordpress
.com/2011/03/10/williampaleys-intelligent-contrivance/
stox apl 12
bibliography
• AQA an introduction to
Philosophy for AS level;
Gerald Jones, Jeremy
Hayward, Daniel
Cardinal
stox apl 12