![]() ![]() The strengths of the design argument are the strengths of inductive reasoning: inductive arguments begin with something that we can observe.‘This proof always deserves to be mentioned with respect’: Immanuel Kant. Remember to read the question first before just regurgitating. It argues that there are things in the world (such as bacterial flagellum and the human eye) that are irreducibly complex in other words, they couldn’t have just arisen by chance: they must have been designed for the purpose they fulfil.ĭon’t forget design qua regularity and design qua purpose.ĪO2: Critical evaluation i.e. This is an argument designed to counter the objection from evolution. Michael Behe (pronounced Beehee): Irreducible Complexity. Certain complex conditions needed to be met in order for life to exist. distance of the planet earth from the sun) human life would not exist. Weak anthropic principle: if even the slightest part of the universe were any different (e.g. ![]() Strong anthropic principle: the universe was designed explicitly for the purpose of supporting human life. Paley believed that just as watches, which exhibit complexity and purpose in order to tell the time for us, have watchmakers, the world, which has complexity and the purpose of sustaining life has a worldmaker God. It was the 5th of his 5 ways of showing the existence of God Scholars whose versions of the argument you must explain…(you need to do it in detail)Īquinas believed that everything in the universe has a purpose and that this purpose is given to it by God, just as the arrow flying through the sky is given its purpose by the archer who fires it. We have to use our senses to verify the truth of this statement. ![]() In the statement ‘there is design in the universe’ there is doubt because the predicate (design) is not contained in the subject (universe). In other words, if I say ‘all triangles have three sides’ the fact that a triangle has three sides (predicate) is contained in the definition (subject). Synthetic: a proposition whose predicate concept is not contained in its subject concept. 1+1=2.Ī posteriori: it is based upon experience: it comes ‘after the fact’ of order and complexity, it is not a priori which is based upon reasoning before experiencing. It is therefore not deductive, which is where the premises of an argument do entail the conclusion, i.e. It is usually based upon information coming from the senses (the order and complexity we observe with our eyes). Inductive: inductive reasoning is where the premises support the conclusion, but they do not entail it. It is an argument that uses analogy: it moves from our experience of things in the world to try to explain the cause of the world itself. P2: Things that exhibit order and complexity have designers Ĭ: The universe has a designer a.k.a. the changing of the seasons or the human eye P1: There is order and complexity in the universe: e.g. AS Religious Studies Revision: The Teleological Argument AO1 Material: i.e. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |